CD Paper Pag 189
CD Paper Pag 189
CD Paper Pag 189
189
C. Briatico
University of Florence, Florence, Italy
190
EVACES07
()
1.0
0.5
Eq. (2)
Eq. (3)
Numerical
0.0
0
2 LOADING MODELS
2.1 Short spans
For a short span footbridge the worst load condition proves to be the transient action of one pedestrian crossing the bridge. This because among the effects of additional pedestrians, the increase in
damping dominates on the increase in excitation. The additional pedestrians, in fact, cannot be
considered as external shakers, as with their movement they also provide out-of-phase forces, to be
seen as further damping for the system. This additional damping is minimised when all the pedestrians step in perfect phase with each other, but such condition is quite unusual when the pedestrians are free to chose their walking frequency and phase.
For this reason, many codes of practice (among which the 1995 version of Eurocode 5) provide for supported beams an equation for the maximum transient acceleration response to a
resonant sinusoidal load in the form:
amax M DLF
a M
=
() = max
()
W
W stat
(1)
in which M is the mass of the structure, W is the weight of the pedestrian, usually taken as 700
N, DLF is the Dynamic Load Factor and the structure damping ratio. The non-dimensional acceleration response is given in eq. (1) as the product of the stationary response and a transient
response reduction factor . This factor is a function of the structure damping and of the number of loading cycles n=L/l, L being the bridge span and l the wavelength of the load. In particular, the transient response reduction factor proves to be dependent only on the product of these
two quantities through the parameter =2n. The equation used in the codes of practice for ()
is derived form a paper of Blanchard and co-workers (1977), in which the transient response reduction factor was obtained by numerical integration of the equation of motion of the structure:
() = 1 e 2
(2)
More recently, an approximated closed form solution of the equation of motion was found
under the assumption of a sinusoidal mode shape, whose derivation is not shown here, bringing:
() =
1 + 2
+ atan
2
2
1+ + e
(3)
Eqs. (2) and (3) are compared in figure 1 in the practical range of the parameter, together
with the exact solution, coming from the numerical integration of the equation of motion. It appears that eq. (2) tends to overestimate the response, while eq. (3) proves quite accurate.
In addition to eq. (3), other equations were found for the approximate response away from
resonance, whose derivation is also not shown here. In the simplest form:
191
100
Eq. (3)
Eq. (4)
Eq. (4)
50
0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
amax M
2 2
= DLF
= DLF ()
W
1 2
(4)
where =fp/fo is the ratio of the frequency of excitation (walking frequency) to the natural frequency of the bridge.
Eqs. (3) and (4) allow plotting an approximated resonance curve for the transient response of
a supported bridge subjected to a sinusoidal moving load. An example of such a curve is given
in figure (2) for =0.01 and =1.2.
2.2 Long spans
For a medium to long span footbridge the worst load condition proves to be that of the stationary action of a crowd. For the particular case in which the density of the crowd is low enough
for the pedestrians not to interact with each other, therefore give rise to a synchronised behaviour, a loading model was presented by Ricciardelli (2005). Based on this, the RMS stationary
acceleration response of a supported bridge can be written as:
aRMS M
8 f o S Fe ( f o )
= BL
W
W
(5)
where foSFe( fo) is the non dimensional power spectrum of the equivalent load associated with
one pedestrian, is the density of pedestrians, and L and B are the span and width of the bridge.
The non dimensional power spectrum of the equivalent load associated with one pedestrian
is obtained as the integral of the power spectrum foSF( fo/fp) of the load associated with one pedestrian centred at the frequency fp weighted through the probability density p( fp) of the walking frequency:
f o S Fe ( f o ) = f o S F ( f o f p ) p ( f p ) df p
0
(6)
192
EVACES07
62
54
116
W [N]
mean
RMS
757
106
552
88
646
129
mean = 1.835
STD = 0.172
H [cm]
mean
RMS
176
5.9
160
10.2
169
9.2
mean = 1.41
STD = 0.224
Age [yrs]
mean
RMS
28
13
26
12
27
12
mean = 0.768
STD = 0.098
f p [Hz]
v [m/s]
l [m]
193
62
54
116
505
40
251
1976
400
fp [Hz]
mean
RMS
1.812
0.172
1.860
0.168
1.835
0.172
1.99
0.173
2.0
2.0
0.18
1.9
1.82
0.12
1.87
0.186
1.8
0.11
l [m]
mean
0.796
0.734
0.768
0.75
0.75
1.5
0.07
1.37
0.71
0.15
1.3
2.0
2.0
v = 0.754f p + 0.024
URC
DTU
Terrier et al.
1.5
v [m/s]
1.5
v [m/s]
RMS
0.095
0.091
0.098
v [m/s]
mean
RMS
1.44
0.117
1.37
0.226
1.41
0.224
1.0
URC
DTU
Terrier et al.
0.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
v = 1.835l - 0.0007
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
f p [Hz]
2.0
2.5
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
l [m]
0.8
1.0
1.2
late any two of the three walking parameters. This as the advantage of allowing fulfilment of the
natural relationship between frequency, speed and stride v=fpl. On the other hand the tests discussed here revealed that walking speed can be reasonably assumed a linear function of both
walking frequency and stride length, while the latter parameters are quite uncorrelated with each
other. Such result is shown through figures 4, 5 and 6. In figure 4 the walking speed is shown as
a function of the walking frequency. In addition to the results of the tests carried out at the University of Reggio Calabria (indicated as URC), eight points are shown, coming from similar
tests carried out at the Danish Technical University (indicated as DTU), and other eight points
coming from the tests presented by Terrier et al. (2005). Together with the experimental points,
also the linear fit is shown, based only on the URC measurements. Such fit shows that the walking velocity is almost proportional to the walking frequency, therefore it seems reasonable to
neglect to constant value of 0.024 m/s and assume a relationship of the type v=0.754fp, where
the slope of the line is in good agreement with the measured mean stride length of 0.768 m. In
figure 4 the lines of equation v=[mean(l)RMS(l)]fp and v=[mean(l)2RMS(l)]fp are also
shown, which define the confidence ranges associated with the relationship between walking
speed and stride length.
A similar approach can be applied to analyse the relationship between stride length and
walking velocity (figure 5). Also in this case, when the constant value of -0.0007 m/s is neglected the linear relationship v=1.835l is obtained from the URC measurements, whose slope
is in perfect agreement with the measured mean walking frequency (see table 2). Also in figure
5 the confidence ranges of the relationship between stride length and walking velocity are
shown, through the lines of equation v=[mean(fp)RMS(fp)]l and v=[mean(fp)2RMS(fp)]l.
194
EVACES07
1.2
1.0
l [m/s]
0.8
0.6
0.4
URC
DTU
Terrier et al.
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
f p [Hz]
2.0
2.5
Finally, in figure 6 the relationship between the walking frequency and the stride length is
shown. In this case the points are quite scattered, without a clear trend. In the figure a line corresponding to the mean stride length from the URC measurements, together with the constant values [mean(l)2RMS(l)] are also shown.
3.2 Walking forces
Depending on whether the loading model of eq. (1) or that of eq. (5) is used, a deterministic or a
probabilistic description of the walking forces is needed. The former is given through the DLFs
associated with the different harmonics of the vertical and horizontal load. The latter is given
through the power spectra of the vertical and lateral load appearing in eq. (6).
In table 3 a summary of the mean and characteristic values of the first five vertical and lateral
DLFs is reported. For the vertical DLFs the characteristic value is that associated with a probability of non exceedance of 75%, while for the horizontal DLFs the characteristic value is that
associated with a probability of non exceedance of 95%. The vertical DLFs are those reported
by Willford and Young (2005), who derived them from the analysis of measurements reported
by other authors. The horizontal DLFs are have been derived from the measurements of Pizzimenti (2005), also presented by Pizzimenti and Ricciardelli (2005). The first vertical DLF
shows a pronounced dependency on the walking frequency, which is reported in table 3. On the
other hand, the second, third and fourth vertical DLFs and the first and third horizontal DLFs
show only a moderate variability with frequency, associated with a large scatter of the data. In
table 3 both the variability with frequency and the suggested constant value are reported. The
remaining DLFs do non show any dependency on walking frequency.
The results of the measurements of Pizzimenti (2005) also revealed that the power spectrum
of the horizontal excitation around the n-th harmonic of the horizontal walking frequency can be
reasonably assumed to have a Gaussian shape, described through the equation:
f nf p 1 2
f S Fhn ( f ) = Cn W 2 exp 2
Bn
(7)
The parameters appearing in eq. (7) can be derived from the work of Pizzimenti and Ricciardelli (2005), and are shown in table 4. To the authors knowledge, no data are available for the
spectra of the vertical component of the load.
3.3 Crowd density
The applicability of the model of eq. (5) is bound to the hypothesis that crowd density is everywhere on the deck lower that a critical value, such that a larger density would cause interaction
among the pedestrians. No tests have yet been performed to characterise the critical density, and
it is suggested that a value between 0.2 and 0.3 pedestrians/m be used in the lack of other data.
195
Vertical
Horizontal
fp [Hz]
mean
75%
fp [Hz]
mean
95%
1.0-2.8
0.37fp-0.35<0.5
0.41fp-0.39<0.56
0.6-1.1
0.05fp -0.011
(0.028)
0.05fp+0.001
(0.041)
2.0-5.6
0.0051
0.0077
3.0-8.4
1.8-3.3
0.0086fp -0.0033
(0.017)
0.009fp+0.004
(0.023)
4.0-11
0.0056fp +0.069
(0.090)
0.0064fp +0.033
(0.069)
0.0065fp +0.013
(0.061)
1.1-2.2
0.0044fp+0.054
(0.070)
0.005fp+0.026
(0.054)
0.0051fp+0.01
(0.048)
2.4-4.4
0.0026
0.0044
>11
3.0-5.5
0.0077
0.011
Bn
0.0616
0.039
0.0288
0.037
0.035
Cn
0.0116
0.00086
0.0078
0.00064
0.00197
196
EVACES07
compared to that predicted through eqs. (1) and (5). Either the one or the other equation is used
in each case, depending on how close to each other were the walking and vibration frequencies.
The closed form solution of eq. (4) predicts the measured response with an error in the range of
34% to +42%. This is mainly explained through the fact that this equation, even though quite
accurate away from resonance, tends to become inaccurate as the system approaches resonance.
Other causes of inaccuracy are associated with the experimental setup, with the assumption of a
sinusoidal deformed shape, and with the short span of the footbridge. The closed form solution
of eq. (3), on the other hand, generally overestimates (between 42% and 77%) the measured response. This is mainly due to the fact that this equation applies in case of resonance, and in the
free walking tests this condition is generally not achieved.
In figure 8 the measured non-dimensional load detuning (difference between walking and
vibration frequencies) is plotted as a function of the theoretical non-dimensional load detuning
(that calculated based on the walking frequency on the stiff floor). Measurement of a zero detuning would indicate that the pedestrian has synchronised its gait to the footbridge vibration.
This situation, however, never occurred in the tests, suggesting that in none of the tests a
walker-structure synchronisation mechanism took place. The maximum measured acceleration
amplitude was 2.26 m/s2, corresponding to a displacement amplitude of 1.51 cm. It is concluded
that in this specific case of a short span, the synchronisation thresholds (both in terms of accelerations and displacements) are larger than the values above.
Finally in table 6 the results of the metronome tests are presented. First it is noted that there
is a discrepancy between the metronome frequency and the walking frequency, indicating that,
especially in the resonance tests the walkers couldnt fully match the triggered frequency. For
the resonance tests the measured acceleration is compared with that calculated through eq. (3).
The predicted acceleration always exceeds the measured one. For those walkers who could better match the metronome frequency (subjects # 2,4,5,7), the overestimation of the measured response through eq. (3) is in the range of 26% to 64%. In this case the overestimation of the response by eq. (3) is justified by the fact that when forced to follow the metronome frequency,
the walkers tend to modify their walking parameters (see the increase in stride length), therefore
modify the action to the footbridge. For the off-resonance tests the measured accelerations are
compared with those calculated through eq. (4). In this case the prediction error is larger when
the walking frequency is lower than the vibration frequency (up to 63%), and smaller when the
walking frequency is larger than the vibration frequency (as low as 4%).
197
W
[N]
H
[m]
gender
559
1.60
647
fp [Hz]
a [m/s2]
l [m]
ratio
floor
bridge
floor
bridge
meas.
calculated
1.72
1.70
0.69
0.69
0.31
0.25 (eq. 4)
0.81
1.77
1.93
1.94
0.71
0.76
1.68
2.98 (eq. 3)
1.77
736
1.76
1.79
1.82
0.83
0.89
1.24
0.86 (eq.4)
0.69
785
1.80
1.88
1.83
0.85
0.90
1.98
2.81 (eq. 3)
1.42
697
1.74
1.87
1.90
0.81
0.87
1.95
2.76 (eq. 4)
1.42
687
1.80
1.82
1.82
0.83
0.85
1.48
2.52 (eq. 3)
1.70
736
1.78
1.95
1.90
0.85
0.89
2.26
2.86 (eq. 4)
1.27
1010
1.88
1.72
1.70
0.77
0.79
0.67
0.44 (eq. 4)
0.66
[( f p -f o)/f o]theor
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
-0.05
-0.1
-0.15
5 CONCLUSIONS
Two loading models for footbridges have been presented, to be used when no synchronisation
phenomena take place on the bridge, neither among the walkers, nor of the walkers with the
bridge oscillation. Values of the parameters contained in the models have been provided, either
as found in the literature, or as obtained by the authors experimentally. Finally, the results of
measurements on a flexible model footbridge have been presented, mainly meant at investigating the variation of the walking parameters due to the oscillation of the bridge. It was noticed
that when free to choose their pace rate, the walkers never modified it, with respect of what it
was on the fixed floor, at least for acceleration amplitudes up to 2.26 m/s2 and displacement
amplitudes up to 1.51 cm. On the other hand, they tend to increase the stride length as the amplitude of oscillation increases. This result is probably related to the short span of the bridge,
and it should not be excluded that on a longer span the same response amplitudes could cause
synchronisation.
Comparison of the measured and predicted response showed that the loading model proposed for short span bridges is generally on the safe side, but also that in particular cases it can
overestimate the response by more than 50%. This result is partly due to the inaccuracies associated with the experiments, partly due to the very short span of the model bridge. On the other
hand, for design purposes eq. (3) is meant to provide the maximum response the bridge can
reach when crossed by one pedestrian at the time. Therefore, its accuracy needs to be checked
based on the maximum of the responses measured for a large population of walkers. When this
is done, the inaccuracy tends to reduce and becomes acceptable for practical applications.
198
EVACES07
fmetr=2.15 Hz
fmetr=1.75 Hz
f
[Hz]
l
[m]
a
[m/s2]
Eq. (3)
[m/s2]
f
[Hz]
l
[m]
a
[m/s2]
Eq. (4)
[m/s2]
f
[Hz]
l
[m]
a
[m/s2]
Eq. (4)
[m/s2]
1.85
0.73
1.23
2.41
1.75
0.72
0.455
0.364
2.08
0.73
0.666
1.07
1.94
0.76
1.82
2.98
1.77
0.72
0.656
0.459
2.08
0.77
0.697
1.11
1.88
0.94
2.01
2.67
1.75
0.89
1.00
0.438
2.11
0.89
1.38
1.20
1.96
0.90
2.36
3.21
1.75
0.87
1.32
0.491
2.15
0.88
1.38
1.01
1.96
0.88
1.93
2.88
1.77
082
0.622
0.486
2.14
0.89
1.11
0.919
1.98
0.87
1.97
2.95
1.77
0.90
1.08
0.504
2.11
0.89
0.982
1.02
1.96
0.94
2.30
2.89
1.77
0.85
1.09
0.394
2.13
0.85
1.26
1.02
1.89
0.85
2.23
4.04
1.73
0.84
0.781
0.451
2.10
0.84
1.16
1.56
REFERENCES
Bachmann H, Ammann W. 1987, Vibrations in structures induced by man and machine, IABSE Structural Engineering Documents 3E
Blanchard J., Davies B. L., Smith J. W. 1977. Design criteria and analysis for dynamic loading of footbridges, Symposium on dynamic behaviour of bridges, Crowthorne, Berks, TRRL SR275
European Committee for Standardization (CEN) 1995. Eurocode 5, 1995: Design of timber structures.
ENV 1995-2 , Brussels
Ingolfsson E.T. 2006. Pedestrian-induced vibrations of line-like structures. Masters Thesis, BYD.DTU,
Technical University of Denmark
Ingolfsson E.T., Georgakis C.T., Jonsson J., Ricciardelli F. 2007. Vertical footbridge vibrations: towards
an improved and codifiable pedestrian loading model. Third International Conference on Structural
Engineering, Mechanics and Computation, Cape Town
Kerr S.C., Bishop N.W.M. 2001. Human induced loading on flexible staircases. Engineering Structures,
Elsevier, 23, 37-45
Matsumoto Y., Nishioka T., Shiojiri H., Matsuzaki K. 1978. Dynamic design of footbridges, IABSE Proceedings, Aug 1978, 17/78, 1-15
Pachi A., Ji T. 2005. Frequency and velocity of people walking. Structural Engineer, 83(3), 36-40
Pansera A. 2006. Analisi sperimentale delle caratteristiche del cammino ed azione dei pedoni sulle
passerelle pedonali. BSc Thesis, Univesrity of Reggio Calabria (in Italian)
Pizzimenti A.D. 2005. Analisi sperimentale dei meccanismi di eccitazione laterale delle passerelle ad
opera dei pedoni. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Catania (in Italian)
Pizzimenti A.D., Ricciardelli F. 2005. Experimental evaluation of the dynamic lateral loading of footbridges by walking pedestrians. 6th European Conference on Structural Dynamics, Paris
Ricciardelli F. 2005. Lateral loading of footbridges by walkers. Footbridge 2005 2nd International
Conference, Venice
Sahnaci C., Kasperski M. 2005. Random loads induced by walking. 6th European Conference on Structural Dynamics, Paris
Terrier P., Turner V., Schutz Y. 200p. GPS analysis of human locomotion: further evidence of long-range
correlations in stride-to-stride fluctuations of gait parameters, Human Movement Science, 24(1), 583591
Willford M.R., Young P. 2005. Improved methodologies for prediction of footfall-induced vibration. 6th
European Conference on Structural Dynamics, Paris
Wheeler J. E., 1982. Prediction and control of pedestrian-induced vibration in footbridges, J. Struct.Eng.
ASCE, 108 (9), 2045-2065
Zivanovic S., PAvic A., Reynolds P., Vuiovic P. 2005. Dynamic analysis of lively footbridges under everyday pedestrian traffic. 6th European Conference on Structural Dynamics, Paris