Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 16931703 www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruc

Vibration analysis of footbridges due to vertical human loads

J.G.S. da Silva a,*, P.C.G. da S. Vellasco b, S.A.L. de Andrade b, L.R.O. de Lima b, F.P. Figueiredo b
a b

State University of Rio de Janeiro, Mechanical Engineering Department, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil State University of Rio de Janeiro, Structural Engineering Department, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil Received 17 August 2006; accepted 5 February 2007 Available online 28 March 2007

Abstract Pedestrian footbridges have been constructed with increasingly daring structures encompassing the experience and knowledge of structural designers by using newly developed materials and technologies. This fact has generated very slender structural footbridges and, consequently, changed their associated serviceability and ultimate limit states. A direct consequence of this design trend was a considerable increase of structural vibration problems. In the particular case of pedestrian footbridges this phenomenon occurs when the structural fundamental frequency is near the load excitation frequencies, or higher frequencies multiples. This was the main motivation for the development of a design methodology to better evaluate the footbridge users comfort and safety. Considering all these aspects a linear elastic nite element analysis contemplating the dynamical response of pedestrian footbridges focusing on critical acceleration values was conducted. The investigated model was based on an existing footbridge located at the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Four different loading models were developed to incorporate the dynamical eects, induced by people walking, in the dynamical response of pedestrian footbridges. The results indicated that this footbridge can reach high vibration levels hat could compromise the users comfort limit state. 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Vibration; Footbridges; Footbridge structural dynamics; Composite structures; Serviceability; Pedestrian walking; Dynamic load factor; Dynamic structural design

1. Introduction Pedestrian footbridges have been constructed with increasingly daring structures encompassing the experience and knowledge of structural designers. This design trend has produced very slender footbridges and consequently changed their associated serviceability and ultimate limit states [14]. In this paper a revised and updated version of reference [1] is presented. The model dynamical response contemplates a critical analysis of the maximum values of acceleration, velocities and displacements. Linear elastic nite

Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +55 21 2587 7537. E-mail addresses: jgss@eng.uerj.br, jgss@uerj.br (J.G.S. da Silva).

element analysis results were also compared to other investigations [59] and design standards [1014]. The investigated structural model was based on a 22.5 m 2.30 m existing footbridge located at the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The composite (steel/concrete) structural system, used for pedestrian crossing, is made a T steel beam section and a reinforced concrete deck. The main span is 22.5 m length simply supported by columns at its ends. The results clearly indicated that the maximum acceleration values violate the human comfort serviceability conditions when compared to limit acceleration targets present in several references and design codes [1014]. Hence it was detected that this structure can, without any doubt, reach unacceptable vibration levels, compromising the footbridge users comfort and especially its safety.

0045-7949/$ - see front matter 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2007.02.012

1694

J.G.S. da Silva et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 16931703

2. Vibrations due to human activities Although the design criteria for evaluation of the vibration levels induced by human rhythmic activities have been known for many years, it has only been recently possible to apply such criteria to the design of oor structures. This was due to the problem complexity. The loads are extremely complex and the structural system dynamic response, generally involves several vibration modes. Along the years, a lot of studies have shown that the problem can be simplied leading to solutions that can be properly applied to the design practice [10]. Most oor vibration problems involve dynamic actions related to repeated forces caused by machines, equipments or for human activities, such as: dancing, jumping, running, aerobics (gymnastics) or walking. The problem associated with people walking is a little more complicated than the others because the forces change location within each step. In some cases, the applied force is sinusoidal or similar. Normally the dynamic excitations induced by human activities can be represented through a combination of harmonic forces, whose frequency, f, are multiples or harmonics of the dynamic solicitation rst frequency, where one example is the step frequency, fs, for human activities. These harmonic forces or time-dependent repeated forces could be represented by the Fourier series, as presented in the Eq. (1) h i X 1 F t P 1 ai cos2pifs t Ui Herein P is the static load, corresponding to the individual weight; ai is the harmonic force dynamic amplier; i is the harmonic multiple (i is equal to 1; 2; 3; . . . ; n); fs is the step frequency (walking, dancing, jumping or aerobics); t is the time and U is the harmonic phase angle. As an example, Figs. 13 present dynamic load functions time records for three dierent human activities such as: walking, dancing and aerobics. These load functions were generated with the aid of Eq. (1). As a general rule, the dynamic coecient, ai , decreases with harmonic increase. For example, the dynamic coe-

cients of the rst four harmonics corresponding to the human activity of walking are 0.5, 0.2, 0.1 and 0.05, respectively. Another important point that should be considered in the oor vibration analysis is associated with the matching of any excitation frequency produced by the humans and the natural frequency of a structural system vibration mode. In this case the resonance phenomenon will occur, causing large amplications in the system dynamic response. In the oor vibration analysis the human activities of dancing, jumping or aerobics excite the rst structural vibration mode, since higher modes are more dicult to excite. This also happens because the people are spread out over a relatively large area and tend to simultaneously force all the oor panels in the same direction, whereas adjacent panels must move in opposite directions for higher modal response [10]. Walking of people generates a concentrated force in certain points of the structure and therefore may excite higher oor vibration modes. However, the higher oor mode shapes are generally excited only by relatively small harmonic walking force components when compared to the lowest oor vibration modes. Thus, in current design practice only the lowest oor vibration mode is considered for human activities [10]. The control of the structural system maximum acceleration, associated to the resonance condition, tends to be more ecient when the sinusoidal forces are small, as in the case of people walking. This control can just be made by increasing the structural damping or mass. The natural frequency is also signicant, because the harmonic force intensity generally decreases with increasing harmonics, i.e., as higher the harmonic frequency, the lower will be the dynamic force intensity. Generally, the design criteria for oor vibration analysis due to people walking are based on these principles. When the dynamic forces are large, as in human activities like dancing, jumping or aerobics, the structure maximum acceleration is signicantly large at resonance and very dicult to be controlled by increasing the system damping or mass. In this case the natural frequency of any mode shape excited by the dynamic force must be

2.0

1.5 Force (kN)

1.0

0.5

0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 Time (s) 1.5 2.0 2.5

Fig. 1. Dynamic load function for one person walking at 2.0 Hz.

J.G.S. da Silva et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 16931703

2.0

1695

1.5 Force (kN)

1.0

0.5

0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 Time (s) 1.5 2.0 2.5

Fig. 2. Dynamic load function for one person dancing at 2.3 Hz.

3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 Time (s) 1.5 2.0 2.5

Force (kN)

Fig. 3. Dynamic load function for one person practicing aerobics at 2.5 Hz.

detuned from the excitation frequency range. This generally means that the structural fundamental frequency must be made higher than the excitation frequency of the highest harmonic force. On the other hand, when the structural natural frequency is near or higher than 910 Hz, the resonance phenomenon becomes less important for human induced vibration. 3. Acceptance criteria for human comfort The primary objective of this section is to present basic principles of design criteria [10], and to evaluate steel and composite framed oor systems and footbridges dynamic response to attend vibration serviceability due to people walking. The design criteria for vibration analysis associated to man induced activities presented in this work can be used to evaluate structural systems used in oces, shopping malls, footbridges and similar. The design criteria [10], was developed based on the following hypothesis: (i) Acceleration limit values were considered as recommended by the International Standard Organization ISO 2631-2 [13]. The ISO Standard [13] suggests limits in terms of rms (root mean square) acceleration as a multiple of the baseline curve shown in Fig. 4. The multipliers for the proposed design criteria, expressed in terms of peak acceleration, are equal to 10 for o-

25

10

Rhythmic Activities Outdoor Footbridges

5
Indoor Footbridges Shopping Malls Dining and Dancing

2.5

1
Offices Residences

0.5

0.25

0.1

ISO Baseline Curve For RMS Aceleration

0.05 1 3 4 5 8 10 25 40

Fig. 4. Human comfort recommended peak acceleration for vibrations due to human activities [9].

ces, 30 for shopping malls and indoors footbridges, and 100 for outdoors footbridges. For design proposes, these limits can be considered to range between

1696

J.G.S. da Silva et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 16931703

0.8 and 1.5 times the recommended values [13], depending on the vibration duration and on the vibration event frequency. (ii) A time dependent harmonic force component, which coincides with the structural fundamental frequency, was considered, as shown in Eq. (2) F t P ai cos2pifs t 2 Herein P is the static load, corresponding to the individual weight 700800 N [810]; ai is the harmonic force dynamic coecient; i is the step frequency harmonic multiple; fs is the human activity step frequency and t is the time. As recommended by the design criteria only one harmonic component is used in the walking case, since the participation of all other harmonic components is small when compared to the resonance condition harmonics. Table 1 presents the forcing frequency averages, fs, and the dynamic coecient, ai , [10]. Thus, considering all the above mentioned hypotheses, a resonance response function, in terms of the maximum system acceleration, can be developed, Eq. (3) a Rai P cos2pifs t g bW 3

Alternatively, Eq. (3) can be simplied considering the relationship between the dynamic coecient for the ith harmonic force component, ai , and the forcing frequency, f, leading to Eq. (4) ai 0:83 exp0:35f 4

Thus, Eq. (3) can be rewritten, based on Expression (4), as presented in Eq. (5) ap P 0 exp0:35f n a0 6 bW g g 5

Herein ap/g is the estimated peak acceleration (in units of g); a0/g is the acceleration limit recommended by ISO 2631-2 [13]; fn is the structure natural frequency and P 0 represents the constant force (P 0 is equal to 0.29 kN for oors and 0.41 kN for footbridges) [10]. The numerator, P 0 exp(0.35 fn , of Eq. (5), represents a harmonic force due to human walking which results in a resonance response at the oor natural frequency, fn. 4. Modelling of dynamic actions induced by people walking In this paper four dierent load models were developed to incorporate the dynamical eects induced by people walking. It must be emphasized that the geometry of the human body walking is an organized movement of legs that causes an ascent and descend movement of the eective body mass at each step. The human body mass accelerations are associated to oor reactions, with an approximately periodic response in terms of the step frequency. This load type is produced by the two feet, as function of the individual static weight and three or four harmonic load components. These harmonics appear due to an interaction between the increasing load, represented by one foot, and a simultaneously unload of the other foot. 4.1. Load model I In this model the dynamical forces that represent the walking load, Fig. 5, were calculated by Eq. (2). They have been applied considering that only one resonant harmonic load was applied on the footbridge highest modal amplitude point, located at middle span, as illustrated in Fig. 7. The excitation frequency was equal to the footbridge fundamental frequency. Considering that the investigated pedestrian footbridge presents a fundamental frequency equal to 5.5 Hz, only the third walking load harmonic with a step frequency of 1.83 Hz was applied (3 1.83 Hz = 5.5 Hz). 4.2. Load model II This walking load representation is composed of a static part, corresponding to the individual weight, and a combination of harmonic forces or time-dependent repeated

Herein a=g is the ratio between the oor and gravity accelerations; g is the gravity acceleration 9.81 m/s2; R is the reduction factor; b is the modal damping ratio and W is the oor eective weight. The reduction factor, R, is equal to 0.7 for footbridges and 0.5 for oor structures associated to two-way mode shape congurations [10]. The reduction factor takes into account that the full steady-state resonant motion does not happen for walking and that the human walking and human perception are not simultaneously with maximum modal displacements [10]. The design criteria considers that the peak acceleration due to human walking can be calculated with the aid of Eq. (3), by selecting the lowest harmonic, i, for which the excitation frequency, f ifs , matches the structural natural frequency. A comparison of the peak acceleration with the recommended human comfort peak acceleration values for vibrations due to human activities [10,13], is illustrated in Fig. 4.

Table 1 Common forcing frequencies (fs and dynamic coecients (ai [6] Harmonic i Person walking fs (Hz) 1 2 3 4 1.62.2 3.24.4 4.86.6 6.48.8 ai 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 Aerobics class fs (Hz) 2.22.8 4.45.6 6.68.4 ai 1.5 0.6 0.1 Group dancing fs (Hz) 1.82.8 3.65.6 ai 0.5 0.1

ai is the peak sinusoidal force/weight of person

J.G.S. da Silva et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 16931703

100 80 60 40 20 0 0 -20 -40 -60 -80 -100 0.5 1 1.5 2
2.5

1697

Force (N)

Time (s)

Fig. 5. Dynamic load function for one person walking at 1.83 Hz considering one harmonic.

1600 1400 1200 1000

Force (N)

800 600 400 200 0 0 0.5 1

Time (s)

1.5

2.5

Fig. 6. Dynamic load function for one person walking at 1.83 Hz considering four harmonics.

forces represented by Fourier series, as in Eq. (1). The curve that represents these loads is shown in Fig. 6. This model considers the same strategy used in the previous load model related to the dynamical load position, Fig. 7. Four

harmonics were used to generate the dynamical forces, as presented in Table 1, and the third harmonic with a step frequency of 1.83 Hz was the walking load resonant harmonic (3 1.83 Hz = 5.5 Hz).
2250

1125

1125

90 50 530

Fig. 7. Load models I and II: the load was applied at the footbridge highest modal amplitude point. All dimensions are in centimetres.

1698 Table 2 Human walking characteristics [4] Activity Slow walking Normal walking Fast walking Velocity (m/s) 1.1 1.5 2.2

J.G.S. da Silva et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 16931703

Step distance (m) 0.6 0.75 1.0

Step frequency (Hz) 1.7 2.0 2.3

4.3. Load model III The third walking load representation is more realistic than the previous models. In this particular model the position of the dynamic load was changed along the time in order to simulate the pedestrians walking across the footbridge, while the generated function depends on space and time. In this modelling the leg movement that causes an ascent and descent movement of the eective human body mass was considered at each step. However, it is still necessary to determine several other parameters relevant to this model like the step speed and size. These parameters are associated to the step frequency and are illustrated in Table 2. The footbridge dynamical forces were calculated based on Eq. (1) and the use of four harmonics, Table 1. Like in the previous model, the third harmonic, with a step frequency of 1.83 Hz, was the walking resonant harmonic

load (3 1.83 Hz = 5.5 Hz). In this case, a rened nite element mesh was used while the dynamical load application time, in contact to the structure, depends of the step size and frequency. The following strategy was adopted: a step size corresponding to the third harmonic, with a step frequency of 1.83 Hz, equal to 0.65 m was used, as shown in Table 2. The step period was equal to 1=f 1=1:83 Hz = 0.5465 s, corresponding to a distance of 0.65 m. Thereby, the adopted procedure considered six forces in order to simulate one human step. Each of the loads P1, P2, P3, P4, P5 and P6 were applied to the structure during 0.5465/ 5 = 0.10933 s, corresponding to each dynamical load contact time, see Fig. 8. However, the dynamical forces were not simultaneously applied. The rst applied load was P1, according to Eq. (1), by 0.1093 s. At the end of this time period the load P1 was set to zero and the subsequent load P2 was applied for 0.1093 s. This process successively continues until all dynamical loads are applied to the structure, Fig. 8. It can be noticed, with the aid of Fig. 6, that all the dynamical actions associated to the time function, will be correctly applied to the structure. 4.4. Load model IV The studied footbridge presented in this paper is located in a city area where a large number of individuals simulta-

One Person Step P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6

13

13

13 65

13

13

2250

50 530

Fig. 8. Load model III: people walking at the footbridge. All dimensions are in centimetres.

J.G.S. da Silva et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 16931703

1699

neously may cross the structure. Therefore, this situation was considered in this model as an extreme load value. This loading model was only used to depict an extreme situation in the analysis. A crowd was considered and this fourth walking load representation is close to the real design situation. However, the dynamic crowd eect, which describes the imperfect coordination between individuals, was not considered in the present analysis. Evidently, the fourth loading model still requires some adjustments. On the other hand, the dynamic eects associated to the resonance condition are indeed substantially high, and this loading model is useful in order to clearly indicate that structural engineers should avoid the frequency range associated to the resonance phenomenon. This way, the humans density walking on a footbridge, without perturbation, varies from 1.6 human/m2 to 1.8 human/m2, approximately ranging from 1.28 kN/m2 up to 1.44 kN/m2. The live load considered in the present analysis regarded 1.6 human/m2 or 1.28 kN/m2 equal to 800 N (0.8 kN) [810].

5. Structural model One of the major goals of this investigation was to consider the human dynamic excitations such as walking or even rhythmic activities like jumping. A detailed denition of this load type was described in items 2 and 3 of the present paper. Those dynamics actions were applied to the footbridge, as depicted in the Figs. 9 and 10. Its important to emphasize that the duration of the dynamical loading induced by human walking, see Figs. 5 and 6, was truncated by 2.5 seconds just to demonstrate the general form of the functions. Those dynamic loads were applied on the footbridge according to the total time of the pedestrians crossing. Only the footbridges steady state response was considered in the analysis, based on each dynamical loading, Figs. 5 and 6. The investigated footbridge is currently used for pedestrian crossing, as shown in the Figs. 9 and 10. The structural system is constituted of composite girders and a 100 mm thick concrete slab, Figs. 9 and 10. The used steel sections were welded wide anges (WWF) made of a 300 MPa yield stress steel grade. A 2.05 105 MPa Youngs modulus was adopted for the steel beams. The concrete slab had a compression strength of 30 MPa and a Youngs Modulus of 3.84 104 MPa. Table 3 depicts the geometrical characteristics of all the steel sections used in the structural model, already presented in Figs. 9 and 10. In this investigation a damping ratio, b equal to 0.03 (b 3%), was assumed. 6. Computational model The proposed computational model, developed for the composite slab dynamic analysis, adopted the usual mesh renement techniques present in the ANSYS program [15]. In the developed nite element model, oor steel girders are represented by three-dimensional beam elements, where exural and torsional eects are considered. The composite slab is represented by nite shell elements. The nal computational model used 318 nodes, 129 threedimensional beam elements and 260 shell elements, which resulted in a numeric model with 1896 degrees of freedom.

Fig. 9. Outdoor footbridge plan.

Fig. 10. Outdoor footbridge cross section.

1700

J.G.S. da Silva et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 16931703

Table 3 Geometrical characteristics of the beam steel sections Beams VS 900 159 I 200 27.3 Height (mm) 900.0 203.2 Flange width (mm) 350.0 101.6 Top ange thickness (mm) 19.0 10.0 Bottom Flange thickness (mm) 19.0 10.0 Web thickness (mm) 8.0 6.86

7. Dynamical analysis For practical purposes, a linear time-domain modal analysis was performed throughout this study. This item presents the evaluation of the structural vibration levels when submitted to walking dynamic excitations. The footbridge dynamic response was determined through an analysis of its natural frequencies, displacements, velocities and accelerations. The results of the dynamic analysis were obtained from an extensive numeric analysis, based on the nite element method utilising the ANSYS program [15]. With the objective of evaluating both quantitatively and qualitatively the results obtained according to the proposed methodology, the footbridge maximum accelerations values, calculated by the developed computational models, were compared to current structural design criteria [10], also to those in current design standards [1014] in order to evaluate a possible occurrence of unwanted excessive vibration levels and human discomfort. 7.1. Natural frequencies and mode vibration The natural frequencies were determined with the aid of the numerical simulations, Table 4. The associated vibration modes are shown in Figs. 1116. In this investigation, a single degree of freedom model (SDOF model) was used in order to conduct the footbridge fundamental frequency calculation from the technical literature [16,17]. It can be clearly noticed from Table 4, that there is a very good agreement between the nite element model fundamental frequency value (f01 5:5 Hz) and the technical literature [16,17]. Such fact validates the numeric model here presented, as well as the results and conclusions obtained throughout this work. When the footbridge freely vibrates in a particular mode, it moves up and down with a certain mode shape. Figs. 1116 illustrate the mode shapes corresponding to the rst six natural frequencies of the studied structural system.
Table 4 Footbridge natural frequencies Natural frequencies f0i (Hz) f01 f02 f03 f04 f05 f06 5.5 15.4 19.3 21.9 33.5 40.9 Fundamental frequency technical literature f01 (Hz) [12,13] 5.1

Fig. 11. First natural frequency mode shape: f01 5:5 Hz.

Fig. 12. Second natural frequency mode shape: f02 15:4 Hz.

Fig. 13. Third natural frequency mode shape: f03 19:3 Hz.

J.G.S. da Silva et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 16931703

1701

Fig. 14. Fourth natural frequency mode shape: f04 21:9 Hz.

Fig. 15. Fifth natural frequency mode shape: f05 33:5 Hz.

Fig. 16. Sixth natural frequency mode shape: f06 40:9 Hz.

7.2. Maximum accelerations The present study proceeded with the evaluation of the footbridge performance, Figs. 9 and 10, in terms of the vibration serviceability due to pedestrians walking. The rst step of this procedure concerned the determination of the footbridge peak accelerations, determined by the developed nite element model (FEM). These maximum accelerations were then compared to results supplied by

design criteria [10] and limiting values proposed by many authors [1114]. It should be noted that the forcing frequency it is significant for the dynamic load denition. Previous experimental studies [2,3,68] considered a frequency band ranging from 1.5 Hz to 2.5 Hz for the forcing frequencies induced by people walking, with a medium reference value equal to 2.0 Hz. Alternatively, the forcing frequencies induced by people running can generate periodic forces with associated frequencies ranging from 2.4 to 2.7 Hz [2,3,68]. References [1114] limiting accelerations for human comfort, without considering their associated natural vibration frequencies, expressed in terms of a percentage of the gravity acceleration. These authors recommend different limiting values for footbridge accelerations [1114]. Tables 57 presents limiting values by several existent recommendations [1014]. However, reference [10] was used in the analysis as a practical guide in order to obtain the peak acceleration, and reference [13] was considered as design criteria. Therefore, based on the values associated to the forcing frequencies induced by people, and considering these load types at footbridge structures, the peak accelerations associated to the load models I, II and III are presented in Table 5. The peak accelerations associated to the load model IV are calculated for excitation frequencies ranging from 2.0 Hz to 5.5 Hz, as presented in Tables 6 and 7. Considering the load models I, II and III, the pedestrian footbridge maximum acceleration values were equal to 0.5%g (load model I), 1.2%g (load model II) and 0.8%g (load model III), see Table 5. These peak accelerations indicate that the outdoor footbridge analysed in this paper did not present any problems related with human comfort [amx (%g) < alim (%g)], when only one person walks on the a investigated structure, according to the presented limiting values supplied by British Standard, BS 5400, mentioned by [8], Matsumoto and Nishioka, mentioned by [8], Tilly & Cullington, mentioned by [8], ISO 2631-2 [13] (see Fig. 4) and Ontario Bridge Code OHBDC [14], Table 5. However, based on the results associated to the load model IV, where an extreme load value was considered, the maximum accelerations were equal to 6.73%g (f 2:0 Hz), 18.35%g (f 3:0 Hz), 46.28%g (f 4:0 Hz) and 385%g (f 5:5 Hz resonance condition), Tables 6 and 7. These peak accelerations indicate that the pedestrian footbridge studied in this paper has enormous problems related to human comfort [amx (%g) > alim (%g)], a according to the limiting values by British Standard, BS 5400, by [8], Matsumoto and Nishioka, by [8], Tilly and Cullington, by [8], by ISO 2631-2 [13] (see Fig. 4) and by the Ontario Bridge Code OHBDC [14], where a frequency band ranging from 3.0 Hz to 5.5 Hz for the forcing frequencies induced by people walking was considered, see Tables 6 and 7. The proposed acceleration limiting values [1114] indicate that the analysed footbridge did not satises its purpose preventing human discomfort, especially at

1702

J.G.S. da Silva et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 16931703

Table 5 Outdoor footbridge peak acceleration at resonance Excitation frequency f 5:5 Hz Load model (LM) Acceleration limiting values International standards organisation, ISO 2631-2 [9] alim (%g) 5%g British Standard, BS 5400, mentioned by [4] alim (%g) 11.95%g Ontario Bridge Code, ONT, [10] alim (%g) 3.46%g Matsumoto and Nishioka, mentioned by [4] alim (%g) 10.0%g Tilly and Cullington, mentioned by [4] alim (%g) 23.91%g

1 Person

amx (%g) a LM I 0.5%g LM II 1.2%g LM III 0.8%g

Load models I, II and III.

Table 6 Outdoor footbridge peak acceleration at resonance evaluated by the design criteria [6,9] Excitation frequency Acceleration at resonance Calculated by the developed computational model (FEM). Load Model IV amx (%g) a 385.0%g Calculated by the practical guide developed by Murray, Allen, and Ungar [6]. amx (%g) a 361.0%g

f (Hz) 5.5

Acceleration limit supplied by international standards organisation, ISO 2631-2 [9]: 5%g Load Model IV.

Table 7 Outdoor footbridge peak accelerations for forcing frequencies ranging from 2.0 Hz to 5.5 Hz. Load Model IV Excitation frequency Load model IV Acceleration limiting values British Standard, BS 5400, mentioned by [4] alim (%g) 7.21%g 8.83%g 10.19%g 11.95%g Ontario Bridge Code, ONT, [10] alim (%g) 2.89%g 3.11%g 3.27%g 3.46%g Matsumoto and Nishioka, mentioned by [4] alim (%g) 10.0%g Tilly and Cullington, mentioned by [4] alim (%g) 14.42%g 17.66%g 20.39%g 23.91%g

f (Hz) 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.5

amx (%g) a 6.73%g 18.35%g 46.28%g 385.0%g

resonance (fn f 5:5 Hz), for an extreme load value was investigated. 8. Final remarks This paper presents the evaluation of the dynamic structural behaviour of footbridges. The developed analysis incorporates the human dynamic loads, such as: walking, dancing, jumping, running or aerobics (gymnastics). The peak accelerations found in the present analysis indicated that the footbridge does not have any problems related with human comfort when only one person walks, according to the adopted design criteria and specic design

standards. However, the maximum values found for footbridge accelerations, when the footbridge was loaded by a large number of humans simultaneously crossing the structure, were 385%g, at resonance, while the maximum accepted values for the acceleration were 5%g according to the specic design standards. It must be emphasized that models I, II and IV do not exactly represent real structure loads. Models I and II do not take into account the pedestrian displacement on the structure and concentrate all the dynamic forces in a single model point. Model IV is associated to an extreme load situation, which is unusual in reality. The authors consider that the load model III is the most suitable to simulate the dynamic forces due to pedestrian walking, for more realistically representing this dynamic action. However, load cases that involve more than one pedestrian walking on the footbridge should be investigated based on the load model III. Future steps of the present investigation were devoted to the development of an extensive parametric analysis where several signicant variables were considered like: other load models, pedestrian number and the footbridge, characteristics (structural system type, main structural span, beams, etc.) Acknowledgement The authors would like to thank the nancial support provided by the National and State Scientic and Technological Agencies: CNPq, CAPES and FAPERJ.

J.G.S. da Silva et al. / Computers and Structures 85 (2007) 16931703

1703

References
[1] da Silva JGS, de Lima LRO, Vellasco PCG da S, de Andrade SAL, Figueiredo FP, Mello AV de A, Dynamical response of composite footbridges due to pedestrian loads, In: Topping BHV, Mota Soares CA, editors. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Computational Structures Technology, Civil-Comp Press, Stirling, United Kingdom, paper 219, 2004. [2] Obata T, Miyamori Y. Identication of a human walking force model based on dynamic monitoring data from pedestrian bridges. Comput Struct 2006;84(89):5418. [3] Ebrahimpour A, Sack RL. A review of vibration serviceability criteria for oor structures. Comput Struct 2005;83(2830):248894. [4] da Silva JGS, Vellasco PCGda S, de Andrade SAL, Soeiro FJ da CP, Werneck RN. An evaluation of the dynamical performance of composite slabs. Comput Struct 2003;81(1819):190513. [5] Pimentel RL, Pavic A, Waldron P. Evaluation of design requirements for footbridges excited by vertical forces from walking. Can J Civil Eng 2001;28(5):76976. [6] Ellis BR. On the response of long-span oors to walking loads generated by individuals and crowds. The Struct Eng 2000;78:1725. [7] Ellis BR, Ji T. Floor vibration induced by dance-type loads: theory and verication. The Struct Eng 1994;72(3):3650. [8] Bachmann H, Ammann W, Vibrations in structures induced by man and machines, IABSE Structural Engineering Document 3E, Inter[9]

[10]

[11]

[12] [13]

[14]

[15]

[16] [17]

national Association for Bridges and Structural Engineering, ISBN 3-85748-052-X, 1987. Chen Y. Finite element analysis for walking vibration problems for composite precast building oors using ADINA: modelling, simulation and comparison. Comput Struct 1999;72:10926. Murray TM, Allen DE, Ungar EE, Floor vibrations due to human activity, Steel Design Guide Series, American Institute of Steel Construction, AISC, 1997. Supplement to the National Building Code of Canada, Commentary on Serviceability Criteria for Deections and Vibrations, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, 1995. CEB/Bulletin DInformation No. 209; Vibration problems in structures. Practical guidelines, 1991. International Standards Organisation/ISO 2631-2; Evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration. Part 2: Continuous and shock-induced vibration in buildings (180 Hz), 1989. Ontario Highway Bridge Design Code, OHBDC, 3rd Edition, Highway Engineering Division, Ministry of Transportation and Communications, Downs view, Ontario, 1991. ANSYS, Swanson analysis systems, Inc., P.O. Box 65, Johnson Road, Houston, PA, 15342-0065, version 5.5, Basic analysis procedures, Second edition, 1998. Clough RW, Penzien J. Dynamics of structures. McGraw-Hill; 1993. Craig Jr RR. Structural dynamics. John Wiley & Sons; 1981.