0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

A State Space Formulation for Moving Loads Identification

[+] Author and Article Information
X. Q. Zhu

Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, PRC

S. S. Law

 Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hunghom, Hong Kong, PRC

J. Q. Bu

 Shijiazhuang Railway Institution, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, PRC

J. Vib. Acoust 128(4), 509-520 (Feb 03, 2006) (12 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2202149 History: Received October 09, 2003; Revised February 03, 2006

A new moving load identification method formulated in state space with regularization on the solution is presented. The bridge deck is modeled as an orthotropic rectangular plate, and the loads are modeled as a group of loads moving on top of the bridge deck at a fixed distance and at a constant speed. The Hamilton principle and the modal superposition principle are included in the formulation. Numerical simulations and experimental tests are employed for the verification and illustration on the effectiveness of the proposed method. The effects of different sensor location, different load path eccentricity, different types of measured information, and measurement noise have been investigated, and the effect of the aspect ratio of the bridge deck is also studied. It is concluded that nine sensors collecting information from nine vibration modes would give reasonably accurate identified results over the practical range of aspect ratio of a modern bridge deck. Acceleration responses are preferred over the velocity and strain responses in this study, and the same type of response should be collected for the same supporting beam in the longitudinal direction.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Orthotropic plate under a group of moving loads

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

A typical single-span bridge deck

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Identification of axle loads with 3% noise (— true force, ---- nine accelerations, - ∙ - ∙ - nine velocities, …… nine strains)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Arrangements of strain gages and accelerometers for 9, 15, and 25 measured points (엯 — accelerometer, ▵ — velocity sensor, × — strain gage)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Identification of axle loads from nine accelerations. (SA 17) (— true force, ---- with zero eccentricity, …… with 3∕8b eccentricity)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Layout of the bridge deck in experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Identification of wheel loads from the measured responses (sensor set 7) (— static load, ---- identified load)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Identification of axle and total loads from the measured responses (sensor set 7) (— static load, ---- identified load)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Identification of experimental wheel loads from the measured responses (sensor set 8) (— static load, ---- proposed method, …… dynamic programing method)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Identification of experimental axle and total loads from the measured responses (sensor set 8) (— static load, ---- proposed method, …… dynamic programing method)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In