The Institution of Engineers,

Malaysia


Universiti
Teknologi MARA


Universiti Malaya

FULL SCALE VIBRATION TEST ON A CONCRETE BRIDGE

SUBJECTED TO MOVING TRUCK
R. Lalthlamuana1 and S. Talukdar2
1. Research scholar and 2. Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati-781039 (India)
E-mail: staluk@iitg.ernet.in



for recording vibration of stay cables. Static and
dynamic bridge deflection under various vehicle
speeds was measured by Hou et al (2005) by
installing inclinometer on the bridge deck. Meng et
al (2007) used GPS and triaxial accelerometer in
the field test to record displacement and
acceleration of suspension footbridge. Potisuk and
Higgins (2007) performed dynamic test on concrete
deck girder Bridge subjected to moving controlled
truck loading using strain gauges and displacement
transducers placed at critical section of the bridge.
Three spans, two lane concrete bridge loaded with
five axle truck was tested by Li and Wekezer
(2008) using strain gauge, displacement transducer
and accelerometer. Two dynamic field test- forced
as well as ambient vibration tests were conducted
by Conte et al (2008) on suspension bridge with an
orthotropic steel deck. Four different controlled
traffic load patterns and seven different vehicleinduced impact load configurations were used in
the forced vibration tests. The dynamic response of
the bridge was measured by force-balanced
accelerometers deployed along the whole length of
the bridge. Two lanes post tensioned reinforced
concrete bridge was tested by Morassi and Tonon
(2008), piezoelectric accelerometers with vertical
axes were used to measure the bridges response to
the vehicle induced excitation. The vertical
dynamic motions of the deck structure were
produced by means of a vibration generator
consisting of a closed-loop electro-mechanical
actuator mounted in a vertical direction. Not only
for updating models but also the dynamic
characteristics obtained from measured dynamic
response are essential for vibration-based structural
health monitoring (Casas and Aparicio 1994,
Doebling et al. 1996, Sohn et al. 2003). Bridge
dynamic test was used by Brownjohn (2003) for
assessment of highway bridge upgrading and finite
element model updating. Siringgoringo et al (2013)
utilized full scale dynamic test for damage
detection and to observe dynamic characteristics of
post tensioned concrete bridge. Furthermore, full
scale bridge test result had been used for
assessment of induced dynamic force on the bridge
and to determine dynamic load allowance factor
(Szurgott el at 2011). Vehicle parameters moving

ABSTRACT
Full scale vibration test data provide useful
information about the physical parameters of the
bridge and serviceability limit. It can also aid to
bridge maintenance policy. In the present paper, the
results of vibration test on full scale railway over
bridge of three spans have been presented with an
emphasis to determine natural frequencies,
damping ratio and peak acceleration level. Five
sensors are placed at different locations along the
bridge span and acceleration data has been
collected from five sensors in data acquisition
system to interpret the behavior of the bridge under
moving truck. A single two axles truck (dumper),
loaded with earth has been allowed to move over
the bridge at different velocities varying from 2045 km/h. The theoretical fundamental natural
frequency obtained from finite element software
SAP2000 has been compared with the experimental
natural frequency and excellent agreement has been
noted. A full scale test result have shown that level
of bridge acceleration due to movement of truck
load increase with the increase in vehicle speed and
becomes significant if unevenness of deck surface
exists.
Keywords: Vibration test, serviceability limit,
moving load, bridge maintenance, acceleration.
1 INTRODUCTION
Full scale bridge dynamic test is a most reliable
method to determine true dynamic properties like
mode shapes, natural frequencies and damping
ratios of bridge which can be used as a basis for
validating or updating of analytical model so that
the models represent the actual bridge properties
and boundary conditions. Lee et al (1987) carried
out both static and dynamic test on an old concrete
bridge. Vibration of bridge subjected to light truck
weighing 2200 kg moving at various speed was
measured with seismographs and accelerometers
placed at the middle of the central of span. Chunha
et al (2001) used a nonconventional testing system
for the field test of cable stayed bridge ambient
vibration. Contact and non contact measurement
using a laser interferometry system have been used


161


2.2 BRIDGE DECK PROFILE MEASUREMENT

on the bridge were identified by Deng and Cai

(2009) based on bridge dynamic test result.
It has been observed from the literature that
number of dynamic test results on full scale bridge
model under actual moving truck is limited
whereas each test result provides a useful source
for testing validity of theoretical models and for
structural health monitoring purpose. Keeping this
in view, the present paper describes in detail
dynamic test recently performed on a three span
concrete bridge near IIT Guwahati campus. The
testing was undertaken to determine bridge
dynamic properties to assess the vibration level.
The acceleration response of the bridge was
measured using an array of five uniaxial
forcebalanced accelerometers. Test results are
compared with theoretical results obtained by
simplified bridge model and 3D finite element
model using commercial software SAP 2000. An
excellent agreement is found between experimental
and theoretical results.

Bridge surface profile was measured using FOIF

OTS635 Total Station with least count 0.1 mm,
possessing accuracy of 0.8mm/1.5m. Vertical
height of bridge surface at the interval of 0.5 m
with three different rows along the span was
measured and the average relative height was
considered as bridge surface roughness. It is worth
mentioning that an approach road settlement of 55
mm is noted during inspection of the bridge
surface. The power spectral density function of
bridge deck surface has been obtained from the
measured profile in order to classify deck
roughness status as per ISO system of classification
(ISO 8606, 1995).
2.3 LOADING CONFIGURATION
Dynamic test was performed using a single two
axles TATA 1616 truck with loaded soil shown in
Figure 2. Gross weight of the vehicle was measured
as 192.4 kN using weighbridge located near test
site. Three vehicle speeds in the range of 20 km/h
to 45 km/h and three runs for each speed were
considered in the bridge test. The test truck wheel
configuration is shown in Figure 3.

2 BRIDGE TESTING
2.1 BRIDGE DESCRIPTION
The tested bridge is of three spans, double lane
concrete bridge located at approach road to IIT
Guwahati from NH-31 near Agyathuri Railway
station, around 16 km from Guwahati Railway
Junction. Each lane is independent and separated
by 0.6 m wide, 0.4 m high divider. The divider is
composed of 0.4 m high, 0.150 m thick concrete
wall retaining filled up soil on both sides. The
bridge was opened for traffic in 2006. Since then
there is a noticeable vibration of structures when
moving load passes. As per the design drawings,
M35 grade of concrete and Fe 415 steel was used
in the construction. The total length of bridge is 89
m, with middle span 39 m and both approach span
25 m and 7.5 m width. The bridge has four post
tensioned cast in situ pre-stressed concrete girders
at 2.4 m spacing and six middle cross girders.
Rocker and roller type bearing has been used at
each end span. Bridge deck is cast with 200 mm
thick RC slab over which asphalt concrete of
thickness 150 mm is laid as surface finishing.
Bridge cross section is shown in Figure 1.

Fig.2 Photograph of test truck TATA 1616

Fig.3 Test truck wheel

dimensions are in m)

configuration

(All

2.4 INSTRUMENTATION
The middle span of bridge was instrumented with
five numbers of accelerometers on the deck over
one exterior girder (Figure 5). The force-balanced
uniaxial accelerometer (Kinemetrics Epi Sensor
ES-U2) possessing a range of 0.25g to 0.4g was
used in the bridge test shown in Figure 4.
Accelerometers readings were collected using data
cable connected to Data acquisition system which
was kept inside a stationary car near the bridge on

Fig. 1 Bridge cross section (All dimensions are in

mm)


162


the other side of the lane. B0554 MGC plus HBM
product data acquisition system with 0.03 m/s2
accuracy, 16 channels and digital measure rate
19,200 values/second/channel was used for analog
to digital converter. Power supply for the
instruments was taken from electric pole beside the
bridge.

3. THEORETICAL MODEL
3.1 SIMPLIFIED ANALYTICAL MODEL
Dynamic bridge test results have been compared
with response obtained from a simply supported
beam subjected to moving point load as shown in
Figure 7.

Fig.7 Simply supported beam subjected to moving

load
.

Equation of motion of simply supported beam

subjected to moving point load can be written as

Fig. 4 Force balanced uniaxial accelerometer with

cable connected to Data Acquisition System.

Eb I b

4 y( x, t )
2 y( x, t )
y( x, t )
+ mb
+ Cb
= P ( x Vt) (1)
4
t
x
t 2

in which mb, EbIb and Cb represents mass, flexural

rigidity and viscous damping of bridge per unit
length respectively. P is the truck self weight and
earth load, is Dirac delta function.
Bridge displacement can be written as (Yang et al
2004)
y(x, t) =

2PL3 /(Eb Ibk 4 4 )

(1 Sk2 ) sin(kt) 2k Sk cos(kt)
(
1
Sk2 )2 + 4(k Sk )2
k =1
nb

Sk
kx
(2k2 + Sk2 1) sin(dkt) }sin( )
+ exp(kkt)2k Sk cos(dkt) +
2
L

1 k

Fig.5. Schematic plan of deck showing Location of

accelerometers (All dimensions are in m)

(2)

2.5 MEASUREMENT OF VEHICLE SPEED

where k=1,2,3..nb is the number of significant mode

considered for bridge, k is a kth modal damping
ratio of bridge. dk is the damped frequency of
vibration of the beam, k =kV/L is the exciting
frequency imposed by the moving load and Sk = k
/k is and nondimensional speed parameters.

During dynamic test of bridge a test truck was

allowed to move over the bridge at different
velocities varying from 20km/h-45 km/h. At each
run, truck speed was measured using Genesis
Handheld Directional Radar gun possessing
stationary accuracy of 1 km/h and sampling rate
of 100 samples/sec. Three average vehicle speed 20
km/h, 30 km/h and 40 km/h were considered as test
truck speed. Truck speed measurement using radar
gun in the field test is shown in Figure 6.

3.2 FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

The tested bridge has been modeled using Finite
element commercial software SAP 2000. A 3D
model of the bridge is shown in Figure 8.
Longitudinal and cross girders have been modeled
as frame element while bridge deck as four noded
shell element with 6 degrees of freedom at each
node. These elements are capable of simulating
both the in plane and out of plane deformation.
Vehicle load in the bridge has been considered as
four point load input, shown in Figure 8 moving
with a constant speed V. la and lb are wheel-base
and wheel-tread of vehicle respectively. The model
is used for modal analysis and for dynamic time
history analysis due to moving load at specified
speed.

Fig. 6 Measurement of truck speed and recording

bridge acceleration


163


Measured accelerations were contaminated by high
frequency noise. Fourth order low pass digital
Butterworth filter (Haykin and Veen 1999) has
been chosen to remove high frequency noise
present in the measured response. Filtered bridge
acceleration response at sensor-1 for different
vehicle speed is shown in Figure 11. Bridge test
result shows that acceleration increases by an
amount of 15% to 52% when vehicle speed is
increased from 20 km/h to 40 km/h. The increased
response is attributed to the higher transient load
imposed due to excessive vehicle vibration caused
by approach road settlement of the bridge at entry.

Fig. 8 Finite element model of bridge (top

isometric view).
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 CLASSIFICATION OF TESTED BRIDGE
SURFACE PROFILE
Contribution of surface roughness in the dynamic
response of bridge has been investigated in the past
research (Coussey et.al, 1989). In the present
study, deck surface height along the span at 0.5 m
distance has been represented in Figure 9.

Fig.11 Acceleration at bridge mid span for different

vehicle speed.
4.3 ESTIMATION OF BRIDGE NATURAL
FREQUENCY AND DAMPING
The natural frequency and damping ratio of the
tested bridge has been extracted from FFT of
acceleration response for vehicle speed 40 km/h
collected at sensor-1 shown in Figure 12. Damping
ratio has also been estimated from the same graph
using half-power bandwidth method.
Let be the band width (Hz), being the
found
difference between 2 and 1,
corresponding to 0.707 Ymax in FFT curve (Figure
12), then for under damped system, one has the
damping ratio () as (Chopra 2009),
(3)
= / 2n

Fig. 9 Measured bridge surface profile

Power spectral density obtained from the measured
surface profile has been compared with ISO
classification of road profile. Figure 10 shows the
tested bridge surface is in very smooth condition.

where n is the bridge fundamental frequency,

Ymax is the peak magnitude of frequency response
curve. The damping ratio is estimated as 4.17%.

Fig. 10 Classification of measured surface profile

using ISO specification (ISO 8606, 1995).
4.2 BRIDGE ACCELERATION RESPONSE
Bridge acceleration responses at different sensor
location subjected to vehicle speed varying from 20
to 45 km/h have been collected. Vehicle speed has
been measured using radar gun, average speed are
found to be 20 km/h, 30 km/h and 40 km/h.

Fig. 12. FFT of bridge acceleration at mid span for

vehicle speed 40 km/h


164


4.4 FINITE ELEMENT MODEL UPDATING
As mentioned in the previous section, Finite
Element model of bridge as per designed drawing
has been made using SAP 2000. First natural
frequency of the model is found to be 2.31 Hz. A
deviation observed in the natural frequency has
been reduced by adjusting the physical parameters
of the bridge. The first mode of vibration of
updated FE model is shown in Figure 13. The
predominant mode is found to be in flexural
vibration of the bridge.

Fig.15 Comparison of peak acceleration response at

different sensor location for 30 km/h vehicle speed

Fig. 13 First vibrational mode of Finite Element

bridge model

Fig.16 Comparison of peak acceleration response at

different sensor location for 40 km/h vehicle speed

4.5 COMPARISION OF PEAK RESPONSE AT

DIFFERENT SENSOR LOACTION

5 CONCLUSIONS

Measured peak acceleration responses of bridge at

different sensor location for different vehicle speed
have been compared with two models- analytical
and Finite Element (SAP 2000). In the first model,
bridge acceleration responses have been obtained
by single point load P equal to test truck gross
weight as 192.4 kN, moving on a simply supported
beam with similar dynamic properties obtained
from bridge test result. In finite element model
vehicle has been idealized as four points load input
48.1 kN each. Comparison of peak responses for
different vehicle speed is shown in Figure 14-16.
Result shows that analytical result is closer to the
field test result. The difference is found around 4%
to 9%. However, the difference increases when
vehicle speed is increased. This may be the reason
that ignoring of suspension characteristics in
vehicle model did not reflect true coupled dynamic
behavior of bridge.

Full scale bridge vibration test under controlled

vehicle load has been carried out in the present
study. Recorded acceleration has been used to find
natural frequency, dominant mode and damping
ratio. Test results show that bridge acceleration is
increased with increase in vehicle speed.
Experimental results have been compared with two
theoretical models- analytical and Finite Element
with same dynamic properties obtained from the
test data. It has been found that simplified
analytical model closely predicts the experimental
results. It is also concluded that bridge surface
roughness in addition to sudden change in road
profile such as approach slab settlement plays a
significant role in the dynamic response of the
bridge when vehicle speed increases.
REFERENCES
Brownjohn, J.M.W., Moyo, P., Omenzetter, P. and
Lu, Y. (2003), Assessment of Highway Bridge
Updating by Dynamic Testing and Finite Element
Model Updating. Journal of Bridge Engineering.
ASCE, 8(3), 162-172.
Casas, J. R. and Aparicio, C. (1994), Structural
damage identification from dynamic test data.
Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 120 (8),
2437-2450.

Fig.14 Comparison of peak acceleration response at

different sensor location for 20 km/h vehicle speed

Chopra, A. K.(2009), Dynamics of Structures. 3rd

Edition. Pearson Prentice Hall, New Delhi, India.


165


Chunha, A., Caetano, E. and Delgado, R.(2001),
Dynamic test on large Cable-Stayed Bridge.
Journal of Bridge Engineering. ASCE, 6(1), 54-62.

Potisuk, T. and Higgins, C., (2007), Filed testing

and analysis of CRC deck girder bridge. Journal
of Bridge Engineering. ASCE, 12(5), 53-63.

Conte, J. P. M., He, X., Moaveni, B., Masri, S. F.,

Caffrey, J. P., Wanhbeh, M., Tasbihoo, F., Whang,
D. H. and Elgamal, A. (2008), Dynamic testing of
Alfred Zampa Memorial Bridge. Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE, 134 (6), 1006-1015.

Siringgoringo, D. M, Fujino, Y. and Nagayama, T.

(2013), Dynamic characteristics of an Overpass
bridge in a Full-Scale Destructive Test. Journal of
Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, 139(6), 691-701.
Sohn, H., Farrar, C. R., Hemez, F. M., Shunk, D.
D., Stinemates, D. W., and Nadler, B. R. (2003).
A review of structural health monitoring
literature: 19962001.Rep.No.LA-13976-MS, Los
Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, N.M.

Coussy, O., Said, M. and Hoove, J. P. V (1989),

The influence of random surface irregularities on
the dynamic response of bridges under suspended
moving loads, Journal of Sound and Vibration,
130, 313-320, 1989

Szurgott, P., Wekezer, J.P.E, Kwasniewski, L.,

Siervogel, J. and Ansley, M.P.E. (2011),
Experimental Assesment of Dynamic Responses
Induced in Concrete Bridge by Permitted vehicles.
Journal of Bridge Engineering. ASCE, 16(1), 108116.

Deng, L. and Cai, C.S. (2009), Identification of

parameters of vehicles moving on bridges, Journal
of Engineering Structures, 31, 2474-2485.
Doebling, S. W., Farrar, C. R., Prime, M. B., and
Shevitz, D. W. (1996).Damage identification and
health monitoring of structural mechanical systems
from changes in their vibration characteristics: A
literature review. Rep. No. LA-13070-MS, Los
Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, N.M.

Yang, Y. B., Yau, J. D. and Wu, Y. S. (2004),

Vehicle Bridge Interaction Dynamics with
application to high speed railways, World
Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.

Haykin, S. and Veen, B.V (1999), Signals and

Systems. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Printed and
bound by Replika Press Pvt. Ltd. Delhi,India.
Hou, X., Yang, X. and Huang, Q., (2005) Using
inclinometers to measure bridge deflection.
Journal of Bridge Engineering. 10(5), 564-569.
ISO 8606:1995. Mechanical vibration-Road surface
profiles-reporting measured data.
Lee, P. K. K., Ho, M.D. and Hung-Wan Chung, H.
W. (1987), Static and dynamics tests of concrete
bridge, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE,
113(1), 61-73.
Li, H., Wekezer, J. F. (2008), Dynamic response
of a highway bridge subjected to moving vehicle.
Journal of Bridge Engineering. ASCE, 13(5), 439448.
Meng, X., Dodson, A.H and Roberts, G.W.(2007),
Detecting bridge dynamics with GPS and triaxial
accelerometer. Journal of Engineering Structure,
29, 3178-3184.
Morassi, A. and Tonon, S. (2008), Dynamic
testing of structural identification of a bridge.
Journal of Bridge Engineering. ASCE, 13(6), 573585.


166