Modal Analysis for the Rehabilitation Assessment of the Luiz I Bridge

Dynamic testing in the condition assessment of existing bridges to support their rehabilitation and strengthening designs is becoming a common procedure, yet additional dynamic testing after rehabilitation is rare. Nevertheless, combining the results of dynamic testing before and after bridge rehabilitation produces unique and valuable information regarding changes occurred in a bridge’s dynamic properties. Such dual testing would allow researchers to verify the behavior predicted at the design stage and to assess the stiffness variation, which would eliminate the need for mandatory field static testing. This article reports the modal analysis of a unique centenary steel-arch bridge that was recently rehabilitated and strengthened. The ambient vibration test conducted after the construction works is described, and the data are compared with those collected before the rehabilitation. Structural identification is completed by means of experimentally validated three-dimensional (3D) finite-element (FE) models simulating both phases. The results bring to light important findings concerning variation in bridge stiffness, changes in the modal parameters, and the impact of support conditions and structure of decks in bridge dynamic properties.

[1]  Chengyu Yang,et al.  Health monitoring data in assessing critical behaviour of bridges , 2007 .

[2]  Filipe Magalhães,et al.  Rehabilitation assessment of a centenary steel bridge based on modal analysis , 2013 .

[3]  Bruno José Afonso Costa.  Structural identification of Old Steel Bridges: Monitoring and Rehabilitation Assessment , 2013 .

[4]  Filipe Magalhães,et al.  Output-only modal identification of Luiz I Bridge before and after rehabilitation , 2006 .

[5]  Raimundo Delgado,et al.  Dynamic Analysis of Metallic Arch Railway Bridge , 2002 .

[6]  Arthur J. Helmicki,et al.  Structural Identification for Condition Assessment: Experimental Arts , 1997 .

[7]  Ahmet Turer,et al.  Structural Identification: Analytical Aspects , 1998 .

[8]  Metwally Abu-Hamd,et al.  Rehabilitation assessment of a steel railway bridge by dynamic field testing , 2007 .

[9]  Ioannis G. Raftoyiannis,et al.  Condition assessment and retrofit of a historic steel-truss railway bridge , 2004 .

[10]  Daniel N. Farhey.  Bridge Instrumentation and Monitoring for Structural Diagnostics , 2005 .

[11]  Bojidar Yanev,et al.  Investigation of the Dynamic Properties of the Brooklyn Bridge , 2005 .

[12]  Michael P. Culmo,et al.  Monitoring Bridge Performance , 2002 .

[13]  Ahmet E. Aktan,et al.  Limitations in Structural Identification of Large Constructed Structures , 2007 .

[14]  Charles W. Roeder,et al.  Dynamic Response and Fatigue of Steel Tied-Arch Bridge , 2000 .

[15]  Constantine C. Spyrakos,et al.  Validated analysis and strengthening of a 19th century railway bridge , 2006 .

[16]  Issam E. Harik,et al.  Roebling Suspension Bridge. II: Ambient Testing and Live-Load Response , 2004 .

[17]  Andreas Johann Felber,et al.  Development of a hybrid bridge evaluation system , 1994 .

[18]  Randall J. Allemang,et al.  THE MODAL ASSURANCE CRITERION–TWENTY YEARS OF USE AND ABUSE , 2003 .

[19]  Issam E. Harik,et al.  FREE AND AMBIENT VIBRATION OF BRENT-SPENCE BRIDGE , 1997 .

[20]  Tong Zhao,et al.  Experimental and Analytical Modal Analysis of Steel Arch Bridge , 2004 .

[21]  Lian Duan,et al.  Section Properties for Latticed Members of San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge , 2000 .