Railway Bridges for High Speed Lines: Dynamic Analysis

Railway Bridges for High Speed Lines:
Dynamic Behaviour and Risk

Analysis and Risk Management in Production Activities
CERUP, Porto 2007
Jose M.a Goicolea

Computational Mechanics Group (http://w3.mecanica.upm.es)
Escuela de Ingenieros de Caminos,
Technical University of madrid
Porto, 10 oct 2007
Motivation
Design Considerations
Service Limit States
Concluding Remarks
Contents
1
Motivation
Recent Events
Some Dynamic Phenomena
Dynamic Effects from HS Rail Traffic Actions
Design Considerations to Evaluate and Reduce Risk

Types of HS Trains
Issues related to bridges
Service Limit States: Risk to Traffic

Design requirements for traffic safety
Track-Bridge Interaction
Concluding Remarks
Railway Bridges for High Speed Lines: Dynamic Behaviour and Risk
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Almunecar, Granada (Spain)

Road bridge under construction
Collapse of scaffold (7 nov 2005):
6 workers dead
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
O Carballino, Orense (Spain)
HSR bridge under construction

Incrementally launched deck
(pushing)
7 sep 2007
1 worker dead
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Baghdad, Sarafiya Bridge
Main urban road bridge

Truck bomb (12 apr 2007)
10 people dead
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Minneapolis
Main urban road bridge
2 aug 2007: Brittle collapse;
13 people dead
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Aeroelastic induced vibrations
Wind Actions (IAPF 2007)

Tacoma Narrows 1940
Normal bridges: static wind

forces
Singular bridges (L > 200
m,. . . ): special dynamic
study
Alconetar Arch 2006

Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
High Speed Railway Bridges
TGV Mediterranee, Donz`ere viaduct (arch. Marc Mimram)

Dynamic analysis: Ing. V. de Ville de Goyet
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Moving load on bridge
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Vertical displacement at centre of span (mm)
Dynamic effect of single moving load: (1 + 0 )sta

v= 220 km/h
v= 360 km/h
Load exits bridge
3
2
1
0
1
sta
sta (dynamic increment)
3
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
Time (s)
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
L = 15 m, m = 15 t/m, f0 = 5 Hz, P = 195 kN, = 2%.

Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Dynamic effect of train
v
P1 P2
P3 P4
P5
P6
P7
(Talgo HS train)
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Time-history of displacements: v = 360 km/h

TALGO AV v=360 km/h, ERRI Bridge L=15m, =0,01; f0=5 Hz, =13.14 m = D
20
UIC71
static
dynamic moving loads
Deflection at center of span (mm)
15
10
5
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
0
0.5
1.5
2
time (s)
2.5
3.5
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Dynamic effect of train: v = 236.5 km/h resonance!

TALGO AV v=236.5 km/h, ERRI Bridge L=15m, =0,01; f0=5 Hz, =13.14 m = D
20
UIC71
static
dynamic moving loads
Deflection at center of span (mm)
15
10
5
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
0
3
time (s)
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Experimental measurements: Tajo viaduct

AVE 100, simple convoy, v = 219 km/h
Measured displacements
[mfom 96]
Computed displacements
[Domnguez 99]
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
HS Trains: Articulated
Thalys, AVE-100 and Eurostar.
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
HS Trains: Conventional
ICE2, AVE-103, Etr-y, Virgin.
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
HS Trains: Regular
AVE-102 (TALGO).
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Dynamic Signature of High Speed Trains

G () closed form expression; = v /f0 wavelength
Talgo AV
ICE2
ETRY
VIRGIN
AVE
THALYS
EUROSTAR
7000
Signature G() (kN)
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
5
10
15
20
Wavelength (m)
25
30
35
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Requirements for Design

Need to consider:
Dynamic effects
All possible circulation speeds, with 20% margin
All existing and foreseeable HS trains
(interoperability)
High Speed Load Model (HSLM)
Family of 10 normalised, ficticious trains
Interoperability of HS lines in Europe (TSI)
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Envelope Obtained with HSLM-A Trains

Dynamic signature envelopes
real HS trains
HSLMA
7000
Signature G() (kN)
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
5
10
15
20
Wavelength (m)
25
30
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Dynamic Response for Bridges of Different Span Length
Max. acceleration at centre of span (m/s2)
16
L=40 m
L=30 m
L=20 m
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
150
200
250
300
Train velocity (km/h)
350
400
ICE2 train, acceleration at mid span

Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Increase Mass of Bridge

Isosttico L=20 m, m=20, 25, 30 t/m variacin de masa
Isosttico L=20 m, m=20, 25, 30 t/m variacin de masa

20
18
20t/m
25t/m
30t/m
30
Aceleracin (m/s2)
Desplazamiento mximo (mm)
35
25
20
15
10
5
20t/m
25t/m
30t/m
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
150
200
250
300
Velocidad (km/h)
350
400
150
200
250
300
Velocidad (km/h)
Effect on resonant response

Frequency f0 and critical speed vcrit decrease with
350
400
Maximum displacements at resonance unchanged

Maximum accelerations at resonance decrease
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Increase Stiffness of Bridge

Isosttico L=20 m, m=20 t/m variacin de rigidez
f0=4 Hz
f0=4.472 Hz
f0=4.899 Hz
30
Isosttico L=20 m, m=20 t/m variacin de rigidez

20
Aceleracin (m/s2)
35
25
20
15
10
f0=4 Hz
f0=4.472 Hz
f0=4.899 Hz
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
5
0
150
200
250 300 350 400

Velocidad (km/h)
450
500
150
200
250 300 350 400

Velocidad (km/h)
Frequency f0 and critical speed vcrit increase with

expels resonant peaks from velocity range
450
500
k:
Maximum displacements at resonance decrease

Maximum accelerations at resonance unchanged
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Simultaneous Increase of Mass and Stiffness

Isosttico L=20 m, f0=4 Hz variacin simultnea m y k
Isosttico L=20 m, f0=4 Hz variacin simultnea m y k

20
18
20t/m
25t/m
30t/m
30
Aceleracin (m/s2)
35
25
20
15
10
5
20t/m
25t/m
30t/m
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
150
200
250
300
Velocidad (km/h)
350
400
150
200
250
300
Velocidad (km/h)
350
400

Frequency f0 and critical speed vcrit unchanged
Maximum displacements at resonance decrease
Maximum accelerations at resonance decrease
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Redundant, Continuous Deck Bridges

Viaduct of Arroyo del Salado, continuous bridge, 30 spans of 30 m,
prestressed in-situ concrete box girder [student project, B. Sanz,
2005].
depth
1
=
span
12
First six modes of vibration:
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Accelerations for Continuous and Simply Supported Deck
Simply supported
Continuous deck
Viaducto con vanos hiperestticos
Viaducto con vanos isostticos

6
HSLM01
HSLM02
HSLM03
HSLM04
HSLM05
HSLM06
HSLM07
HSLM08
HSLM09
HSLM10
Lmite admisible
Aceleracin en centro de vano 1 (m/s2)
Aceleracin en centro de vano 1 (m/s2)
0
100
150
200
250
300
Velocidad (km/h)
350
400
450
Satisfies dynamic requirements
HSLM01
HSLM02
HSLM03
HSLM04
HSLM05
HSLM06
HSLM07
HSLM08
HSLM09
HSLM10
Lmite admisible
0
100
150
200
250
300
Velocidad (km/h)
350
400
450
Not valid: amax > 3.5 m/s2
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Viaduct Las Piedras (F. Millanes, 2004)
Twin steel girder open section, low torsional stiffness
Partially closed section, higher torsional stiffness

Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Viaduct Las Piedras (II)

Total length 1208.5m, spans of L = 63.5 m, 92 m high pier
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Viaduct Las Piedras (III). Acceleration envelopes

Vertical acceleration, w. bending and torsion, center of lateral span
Open section
8
AVE
ETRY
EUROSTAR 373/1
ICE2
TALGO AV
THALYS
VIRGIN
6
2
5
4
3
5
4
3
0
100
150
200
250
300
v (km/h)
350
400
AVE
ETRY
EUROSTAR 373/1
ICE2
TALGO AV
THALYS
VIRGIN
aceleracin (m/s2)
aceleracin (m/s )
Partially closed section
450
Not valid: amax > 3.5 m/s2
0
100
150
200
350
400
450
Satisfies dynamic requirements
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
250
300
v (km/h)
Concluding Remarks
Design requirements for traffic safety

Vertical accelerations of deck
For high levels of vibration ballast has been show to destabilize
Requirement: a 3.5m/s2 .
Track-Bridge Interaction
Long welded rail in bridges: longitudinal loads from thermal
actions, braking/acceleration carried by deck and rail;
Forces transmitted to piers and abutments from combined
actions of structure and track;
Rail stresses due to thermal actions, braking and acceleration
and other traffic loads;
Relative movements and deformations at the ends of the deck
due to the above variable actions.
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Models to Consider for Track-Bridge Interaction

Nonlinear model: bilinear law for interaction
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Additional Stress in Rail from Braking

Stress in rail
0
Stress (MPa)
-50
Fixed abutment
-100
Deck L = 396 m
Sliding joint
-150
Maximum compression 151.57 MPa
-200
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Long. coordinate (m)
1200
1400
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Horizontal Displacement from Braking/Acceleration
Relative displacement at deck joint: 2 5mm
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Horizontal Displacement from Bending due to Traffic

Loads
Relative displacement at edge of deck joint:
3 5mm
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Vertical (Normal) Displacement at Edge from Variable

Actions
Relative displacement at deck joint: 4 2mm
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Solution (example) for long viaduct: fixed point at center
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
Concluding Remarks
High Speed Railway (HSR) bridges are a new and important
type of infrastructure.
New phenomena whose risk must be adequately considered:
construction, dynamic effects, TrackBridge interaction.
Dynamic analysis is necessary for HS bridges to consider
resonance
Serviceability Limit States (SLS) for the structure are of
utmost importance, as they become Ultimate Limit States for
the safety of traffic
New codes for actions in HSR bridges: EN 1991-2 2003, EN
1990-A1 2005, IAPF 2007
Jos
e M.a Goicolea
Motivation
Concluding Remarks
The End
THANKS FOR YOUR

ATTENTION
Recognition
Coworkers/researchers: J. Domnguez, J.A. Navarro, F.
Gabaldon,
Master students: F. Ruano, B. Sanz, A. Camara, I. Barrios,
R. Dias
Motivation: J. Nasarre, E. Alarc
on; Dir. General Ferrocarriles
(J. Santos, I. Alonso, A. Corral)
Jos
e M.a Goicolea

Railway Bridges for High Speed Lines: Dynamic Analysis

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Railway Bridges for High Speed Lines: Dynamic Analysis

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Railway Bridges for High Speed Lines:

Dynamic Behaviour and Risk

Jose M.a Goicolea

Porto, 10 oct 2007

Service Limit States

Design Considerations to Evaluate and Reduce Risk

Service Limit States: Risk to Traffic

Service Limit States

Almunecar, Granada (Spain)

Service Limit States

O Carballino, Orense (Spain)

HSR bridge under construction

Service Limit States

Baghdad, Sarafiya Bridge

Main urban road bridge

Service Limit States

Service Limit States

Aeroelastic induced vibrations

Wind Actions (IAPF 2007)

Normal bridges: static wind

Alconetar Arch 2006

Service Limit States

High Speed Railway Bridges

TGV Mediterranee, Donz`ere viaduct (arch. Marc Mimram)

Service Limit States

Moving load on bridge

Service Limit States

Vertical displacement at centre of span (mm)

Dynamic effect of single moving load: (1 + 0 )sta

sta (dynamic increment)

L = 15 m, m = 15 t/m, f0 = 5 Hz, P = 195 kN, = 2%.

Service Limit States

Dynamic effect of train

Service Limit States

Time-history of displacements: v = 360 km/h

Deflection at center of span (mm)

Service Limit States

Dynamic effect of train: v = 236.5 km/h resonance!

Deflection at center of span (mm)

Service Limit States

Experimental measurements: Tajo viaduct

Service Limit States

Thalys, AVE-100 and Eurostar.

Service Limit States

ICE2, AVE-103, Etr-y, Virgin.

Service Limit States

Service Limit States

Dynamic Signature of High Speed Trains

Signature G() (kN)

Service Limit States

Requirements for Design

Service Limit States

Envelope Obtained with HSLM-A Trains

Signature G() (kN)

Service Limit States

Dynamic Response for Bridges of Different Span Length

Max. acceleration at centre of span (m/s2)

ICE2 train, acceleration at mid span

Service Limit States

Increase Mass of Bridge

Isosttico L=20 m, m=20, 25, 30 t/m variacin de masa

Desplazamiento mximo (mm)

Effect on resonant response