Biomechanically Inspired Modeling of Pedestrian-Induced

Vertical Self-Excited Forces

Mateusz Bocian1; John H. G. Macdonald2; and Jeremy F. Burn3

Abstract: Although many models of pedestrian dynamic loading have been proposed, possible bidirectional interactions between the
walker and the excited structure are generally ignored, particularly for vertical vibrations. This shortcoming has arisen from scarcity of data
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Bristol on 11/27/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

on gait-adaptation strategies used in the presence of structural motion and, as a consequence, the absence of a credible fundamental pedestrian
model capable of capturing the underlying relations between the two dynamic systems. To address this inadequacy of current approaches,
a biomechanically inspired inverted-pendulum pedestrian model has been applied to the human-structure interaction problem. The behavior
of the model is studied when subjected to vertical motion of the supporting structure, in particular, in relation to potential self-excited forces
that can be generated. A mechanism has been identied by which the timing of pedestrian footsteps can be altered subtly, giving a net damp-
ing effect on the structure, without necessarily involving full synchronization. It has been found that depending on the ratio between the
bridge vibration frequency and pedestrian pacing frequency, walkers can effectively act as positive or negative dampers to the structural
motion, but it is expected that for a group of pedestrians with distributed parameters, their action is, on average, to add damping and mass.
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000490. 2013 American Society of Civil Engineers.
CE Database subject headings: Bridges; Human factors; Pedestrians.
Author keywords: Bridges; Human-structure interaction; Biomechanics; Gait; Inverted-pendulum model; Vertical pedestrian forces.

Introduction pedestrian weight and the constant-amplitude rst harmonic only

Pedestrian excitation of footbridges and other lively structures
remains of concern. Despite advances in the modeling of human-
induced forces in recent years, there are still signicant uncertain-
ties. In particular, pedestrian loading models generally consider the
dynamic loading to be an external force to the structure (Racic et al.
2009) with the vast majority of existing modeling approaches based
on an assumption of periodicity of gait. This simplication allows
denition of the time-varying vertical force as a sum of harmonic
components in the general form of (Bachmann and Ammann 1987)
P
j   stitution (BSI) 2003; b 2005]. In other cases, extensive simulations of
F G DGi sin 2ip fp t 2 wi (1)
i1
where G 5 pedestrian weight; i 5 ith harmonic; DGi 5 load
amplitude of the ith harmonic; fp 5 pedestrian walking frequency;
t 5 time; wi 5 phase angle of the ith harmonic relative to the rst
harmonic (with w1 obviously equal to 0); and j 5 number of
harmonics considered. Different variations of this mathemat-
ical formulation have been suggested, some comprised of the
1 on its opening day in 2000. Similar behavior has since been identied
Ph.D. Student, Depts. of Civil Engineering and Mechanical Engi-
neering, Univ. of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1TR, U.K. (corresponding author).
E-mail: Mateusz.Bocian@bristol.ac.uk
2
Reader, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Bristol, Bristol BS8
1TR, U.K.
3
Senior Lecturer, Depts. of Mechanical Engineering and Anatomy,
Univ. of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1TR, U.K.
Note. This manuscript was submitted on July 26, 2012; approved on
March 20, 2013; published online on March 22, 2013. Discussion period
open until May 1, 2014; separate discussions must be submitted for in-
dividual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Bridge Engineering,
Vol. 18, No. 12, December 1, 2013. ASCE, ISSN 1084-0702/2013/12-
13361346/$25.00.
[International Federation for Structural Concrete (b) 2005] and
others acknowledging the signicance of higher harmonics, with
the amplitudes of the harmonics growing with walking frequency
(Inglfsson et al. 2008). A consequence of movement of a pedestrian
along the bridge in the context of modal response is usually accounted
for by application of a moving force to the structure (at the changing
pedestrian location). To simulate an action of a crowd of walkers,
multiplication factors are sometimes applied to the loading function
derived for a single pedestrian [International Organization for Stan-
dardization (ISO) 2007], with other factors adopted to account for
possible frequency and phase synchronization [British Standards In-
pedestrians modeled as inhomogeneous discrete particles crossing the
bridge are conducted to estimate response of a structure to vertical
crowd loading [Technical Department for Transport, Roads and
Bridges Engineering and Road Safety/French Association of Civil
Engineering (SETRA/AFGC) 2006; Butz et al. 2008; Inglfsson et al.
2008]. Although most models treat the pedestrian loading as an external
force (Dallard et al. 2001; Racic et al. 2009), the motion of the structure
can in fact affect the human behavior, thus modifying the dynamic
interaction forces. The most public demonstration of this was the large-
amplitude lateral motion of the London Millennium Footbridge (LMF)
on many other bridges. Tests on the LMF itself led to the nding that
pedestrians acted as negative dampers to the bridge motion (Dallard
et al. 2001) because of some change in their gait. That is to say, the
motion of the bridge gave rise to a component of the pedestrian force in
phase with and proportional to the bridge velocity. Such self-excited
forces cannot be modeled as predened external forces but require
consideration of the bidirectional human-structure interaction.
Vertical vibrations of footbridges and other such structures are
more commonly of concern because when the negative damping ef-
fect just described is not critical, the vertical dynamic forces from
pedestrians are much larger than the lateral forces. However, existing

1336 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING ASCE / DECEMBER 2013

J. Bridge Eng. 2013.18:1336-1346.

 methods of predicting vertical vibration responses of bridges from
pedestrian loading are still often inaccurate. This has been highlighted
recently in a review of several methods in comparison with full-scale


measurements by Zivanovi c et al. (2010). It was suggested that apart
from other shortcomings of some of the methods, the effect of human-
structure interaction was effectively to increase the damping of the
structure. It was estimated that the effective damping of one bridge,
with a natural frequency of 2.04 Hz, was increased by a factor of
approximately 2.5 as a result of the presence of walking pedestrians.
Similar suggestions had been made previously by other authors based
on full-scale measurements (Willford 2002; Brownjohn et al. 2004).
However, such information remains sparse and uncertain, so there is
a need to investigate this potential effect further. To address this issue,
a biomechanical biped pedestrian model is applied to a vertically
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Bristol on 11/27/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
oscillating structure to investigate the effect of vertical bridge motion
on human gait and hence on the interaction forces. A simple foot-
placement control law satisfying kinematic constraints is adopted to
ensure forward progression. The results from the model in terms of the
equivalent added damping and mass to the bridge are compared with the
available data from full-scale bridges and experimental investigations.
Modeling of Human-Structure Interaction
Biomechanically inspired modeling of pedestrian action in the context
of engineering structures is a relatively novel direction of research. Its
emergence is the result of serviceability problems experienced by two
high-prole bridges: the Solferino Footbridge in Paris, opened in 1999
(Danbon and Grillaud 2005), and the previously mentioned LMF
(Dallard et al. 2001). When subjected to crowd loading, unforeseen
large divergent amplitude lateral vibrations developed, causing the
authorities to make decisions of close and later retrot of these bridges
with damping devices. Since then, many other bridges susceptible to
pedestrian-induced vibrations have been identied, and much effort
has been spent on studying the cause of this phenomenon. Most of the
proposed explanations focus on synchronization of the pedestrians
frequencies with the structural vibration frequency and adjustments of
the pedestrians phases so as to increase bridge motion. This, perhaps
the most intuitive, solution could not, however, explain instability of
two other bridges: the Changi Mezzanine Bridge at Singapore Airport
(Brownjohn et al. 2004) and the Clifton Suspension Bridge in
Bristol, United Kingdom (Macdonald 2008), where no evidence of
synchronization was observed during periods of instability. The
measurements from these bridges indicated that some other
mechanism is required, conceivably similar to Barkers (2002)
model, in which the lateral force was obtained from the action of
a mass moving along the bridge in a straight line, supported by an
inclined leg alternately switching from right to left. Although this
simple model was not scientically justied, an important discovery
was madepedestrians can effectively input energy into a vibrating
bridge even if their walking frequencies are far from the frequency
of the vibrating structure. Direct empirical evidence of this was
obtained from tests during which pedestrians walked on a laterally
oscillating instrumented treadmill by Pizzimenti and Ricciardelli
(2005) and later by Inglfsson et al. (2011). A rigorous explanation
was provided by Macdonald (2009), who built a biomechanically
inspired biped inverted-pendulum model in which a stepping
strategy was adopted based on the requirement of maintaining
balance (Hof 2008). Unlike in Barkers model, motion of the mass
of pedestrians was included, therefore allowing for full pedestrian-
bridge dynamic interaction. Bocian et al. (2012) found that the
output of this model is in quite good agreement with the experi-
mental investigations and measurements on full-scale bridges.
A new trend in modeling vertical pedestrian loading has origi-
nated only recently, prompted by observations that the presence of
JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING ASCE / DECEMBER 2013 / 1337
J. Bridge Eng. 2013.18:1336-1346.
walkers can alter the damping characteristics of bridges (Willford


2002; Brownjohn et al. 2004; Zivanovi c et al. 2010). Similar ndings
have been made in measurements of the effects of standing and sitting
crowds, e.g., on grandstands, where it has been suggested that the
mechanical impedance of the human body is a potential source of this
behavior [Institution of Structural Engineers (ISE) 2008]. That is to
say, the human body does not behave as a rigid mass, but its dynamic
response, when subjected to vibrations, is more complex, with the
applied force having components other than just the one in phase with
acceleration (Grifn 1990). Modeling of the mechanical impedance
has been conducted most often with appropriately arranged and
calibrated vertically coupled spring-mass-damper (SMD) systems,
and this approach is gaining popularity in modeling the effects of
pedestrian occupancy of structures. Kim et al. (2008) adopted the
two-degree-of-freedom SMD body model in ISO 5982:1981 (ISO
1981) for analysis of pedestrian-induced vertical bridge vibra-
tions. A single-degree-of-freedom SMD body model was used by
Brownjohn et al. (2004), Tavares da Silva and Pimentel (2011), and
Caprani et al. (2011). Alexander (2006) added an actuator to the two-
degree-of-freedom SMD crowd-structure system model, although
pedestrians were not treated there as discrete entities. However, there
is a clear shortcoming of these models for walking pedestriansthey
are not able to fully capture the inuence of the feedback from the
vertical motion of the walking surface on the kinematics and kinetics of
human gait. Specically, the changes in gait parameters resulting from
disturbance to the trajectory of the center of mass (COM) are neglected,
which can potentially modify the pedestrian loading. This originates in
the fact that these models ignore the bipedal nature of human locomotion.
Humans use two lower limbs for normal (i.e., nonpathologic and
unconstrained) walkinga form of locomotion termed bipedalism.
The implications of this feature on human gait are profound, inuencing
qualities such as speed, acceleration, and maneuverability, endurance,
economy, energy, and at last but not least, stability (Alexander 2003).
The last of these qualities is possibly the most essential to a functional
gait because while different legged animals have gaits that differ in
patterns of movement (e.g., walking, running, hopping, trotting, and
galloping), their gaits share a common characteristicthey are rst and
foremost stable. The reason for this is simplethe energy losses as-
sociated with lack of stability are too costly (e.g., recovery of potential
energy and buildup of kinetic energy level after a fall). This also reveals
why no credible model of human walking exists in the eld of bio-
mechanics that ignores bipedalism. Therefore, in contrast with other
models of vertical human-structure interaction for walking pedestrians,
a bipedal model is considered here in which the bridge motion perturbs
the gait and challenges its stability. In line with the statement that
simplicity promotes understanding validated in this context by McGeer
(1990) and Alexander (1992), the focus of this paper is identication of
the fundamental relations between a pedestrian modeled as a minimal
biped and a vertically oscillating bridge. The motion of the bridge is
shown to modify the passive motion of the pedestrians COM and thus
cause the emergence of self-excited forces on the structure.
Minimal Biped Model
The simplest possible stepping model of human gait is a rigid inverted
pendulum with instantaneous transfer from one leg to the other. This
model is especially valid for the single support phase of the gait,
which, depending on step rate, comprises around 7095% of the
whole gait cycle (Inman et al. 1981). In this period, the CoM moves
along the arc determined by the length of the stance limb, here the
pendulum leg. An advantage of this process is that as for a normal
pendulum, energy is conserved. There is transfer between gravita-
tional potential energy and kinetic energy, but once initiated, no
mechanical work is required to sustain motion. Similar efciencies can
 be made by exploiting passive dynamic characteristics of the swing
leg moving to the new position at the beginning of the next step
under the action of gravity alone (Mochon and Mcmahon 1980) and
by treating the entire single-support phase as motion of a coupled
two-pendulum system (Kuo 2007).
In accordance with the preceding statements, the mathematical
model adopted in this study is conceptually similar to the minimal
biped built by Alexander (1995). The mass of the pedestrian is con-
centrated at a point on top of a massless rigid leg and is pivoted at the
point where the leg meets the ground (Fig. 1). The equation of motion
for the inverted-pendulum model depicted in Fig. 1 during the single-
support phase is easily derived by applying dAlemberts principle and
taking moments about the support point or using the Lagrangian
formalism
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Bristol on 11/27/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
u 21 g zcos u (2)
l Self-Excited Forces
where u 5 support-leg inclination angle; l 5 equivalent inverted-
pendulum length; g 5 gravitational acceleration; z 5 vertical dis-
placement of the bridge; and dots over the symbols represent
derivatives with respect to time. Because Eq. (2) is nonlinear, the
MathWorks MATLAB ode45 numerical ordinary differential equa-
tion solver, incorporating the Runge-Kutta algorithm, was used to
obtain time-history solutions. Variable time steps were allowed for the
solver for computation efciency, with the upper bound set to 0.01 s.
The results were then resampled into time series with regular 0.001 s
sampling intervals. The vertical force on the bridge F is given by
 
F mp g z l
u cos u 2 lu_ sin u
2
(3)
where mp 5 pedestrian mass.
Clearly, the motion of the bridge z perturbs the motion of the
pedestrian COM u, as given by Eq. (2), which thus modies the
interaction force, in accordance with Eq. (3). This is a direct con-
sequence of the bipedalism and has not been captured by any
previous model of vertical human-structure interaction.
For simplicity, the transfer from one leg to the other is taken to be
instantaneous, and the dynamics of the swing leg are omitted. The
latter simplication is made based on the observation by Pandy
(2003) that the vertical ground reaction force during the single-
support phase is mainly a result of the stance-leg dynamics. To
account for the change in vertical velocity necessary at the transfer,
Fig. 1. Inverted-pendulum pedestrian model subjected to vertical
ground motion (gray continuous lines show the conguration of legs at
transfer to next step)
1338 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING ASCE / DECEMBER 2013
J. Bridge Eng. 2013.18:1336-1346.
a vertical impulse is applied at the moment of transition that imitates
the heel strike of the leading leg and push-off of the trailing leg. For
steady-state walking on stationary ground, the magnitude of this
impulse is calculated based on an assumption that the forward
component of velocity at the transition is conserved, whereas the
vertical velocity component changes sense.
The output of the inverted-pendulum model in terms of the
vertical and longitudinal ground reaction forces (GRFs) for un-
perturbed walking (z 5 0) is shown in Fig. 2 in comparison with
measured data averaged over 10 subjects. As can be seen, the
longitudinal GRF is captured very well by the model. For the
vertical GRF, the characteristic peaks in the measured forces near
the beginning and end of each step are concentrated in the sim-
plied model in impulses at the transition instants.
To consider the inuence of vertical bridge motion on the interaction
forces, sinusoidal motion of the supporting surface was assumed for
all the following analysis, given by:
zt A sinvb t (4)
where A 5 amplitude of the bridge motion; and vb 5 angular
frequency.
The effect of the bridge motion on the pedestrian modies the
interaction force [see Eqs. (2) and (3)], which can potentially in-
clude components at the bridge frequency and which from the point
of view of the bridge equation of motion (not addressed here per se)
can be considered as equivalent to added mass and added damping
of the structure. Although there is no fundamental difculty in
modeling the structure as well, this would involve additional
parameters and would detract from the main goal with no real
benet. From the point of view of the individual studied here, the
bridge is forced by the crowd or other external loading, and the
individuals inuence on bridge motion is minor. The pedestrian
effectively experiences imposed motion of the walking surface,
which would be dominated by one or more natural frequencies of
Fig. 2. Performance of the inverted-pendulum pedestrian model walking
at 5 km=h with l 5 1:045 m and fp 5 2 Hz in terms of vertical force
(continuous curve with discontinuous arrowed lines at the transition points
between steps indicating instantaneous impulses) and longitudinal force
(dashed curve) in comparison with averaged data measured from subjects
walking at the same speed on a mechanical treadmill (data from Masani
et al. 2002)
 the structure. For simplicity, here the bridge motion is taken to be at
one frequency [Eq. (4)]. The effect of the interaction is quantied in
terms of the self-excited forces generated by the bridge motions
effect on the pedestrian. These forces could be applied to the
equation of motion of the bridge (with any parameter values), if
desired. The net effect of a large number of pedestrians applied in
this way can become signicant. This approach was used by
Bocian et al. (2012) to study human-structure interaction for lateral
vibrations, yielding good agreement with the results of simulations of
a large number of individually modeled pedestrians fully interacting
with the equations of motion of two bridge modes.
The average components of the self-excited force at the bridge
vibration frequency in phase with the bridge velocity Fvvseb and in
phase with the bridge acceleration Favseb are given by (Macdonald
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Bristol on 11/27/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
2009; Bocian et al. 2012)
T0T
2 Apart from bipedalism, another important feature of human walking is
F vvseb F cosvb t dt
T
T0
T0T
F vaseb 22 F sinvb t dt
T central nervous system (CNS), little, if any, control is required in the
T0
where overbars represent averages; T0 5 arbitrary reference time
(after any initial transient behavior); and T 5 complete integration
interval. To correctly capture the long-term average, T should cover
integer numbers of bridge and pedestrian cycles with a representa-
tive distribution of relative phases between them. The equivalent
added damping DC and added mass DM per pedestrian are then
found from
F vvseb
DC
Avb
F vaseb
DM
Av2b
Positive equivalent added damping is benecial because it
increases the amount of global damping. Conversely, negative equiv-
alent added damping is adverse. Furthermore, for free (rather than
imposed) vibrations of the structure, positive equivalent added mass can
potentially decrease the vibration frequency, whereas negative equiv-
alent added mass can cause the vibration frequency to increase. Con-
ventionally, the equivalent added mass may be expected to equal the
actual pedestrian mass mp [from the z term in Eq. (2)], but the full
interaction is more complex, giving rise to variable DC or DM
depending on the system parameters and the control law at the
transition from one foot to the other.
Parameters
To properly assess the dynamics of the model, a number of parameters
have to be dened that are physiologically plausible and at the same
time fulll the condition of dynamic similarity of the solution with
actual human gait. The average values of pedestrian mass and height
were established based on data published by the U.K. National Health
Service (NHS) in December 2009 from a representative sample of the
English population aged 16 and over (NHS 2009). These were, re-
spectively, 76.9 kg and 1.683 m. The corresponding leg length of
0.871 m was obtained using the approximately linear relationship to
pedestrian height as stated by Pheasant (1982), averaging between
J. Bridge Eng. 2013.18:1336-1346.
characteristic values for males and females. Subsequently, the equiv-
alent inverted-pendulum length in the sagittal plane (vertical plane con-
taining the direction of progression) was found from a formula adopted
from Hof et al. (2005): l 5 1:2 3 leg length, giving l 5 1:045 m. The
established values of mp and l will be hereafter referred to as repre-
sentative pedestrian parameters.
The average frequency and velocity of people walking freely on
footbridges and shopping oors have been measured as 1:8 Hz and
1:3 m=s and 2 Hz and 1:4 m=s, respectively (Pachi and Ji 2005).
Therefore, in this paper, a pedestrian walking frequency of 1.86 Hz
and mean walking velocity of 1:33 m=s were taken as typical for
unrestricted walking obtained from the averages of the preceding
values weighted toward results measured on footbridges.
Step-Transition Control Law
(5) direction-dependent control of balance. This quality implies variation
between strategies adopted for correcting postural instability in the
sagittal and frontal (i.e., vertical plane perpendicular to the sagittal
plane) reference planes. Specically, whereas the dynamic stability in
(6) the frontal plane is achieved with active control executed by the
sagittal plane (OConnor and Kuo 2009). This obviously applies to
normal walking conditions, i.e., unperturbed gait. However, it seems
reasonable for the same control mechanism to be valid in the sagittal
plane for walking on a vertically oscillating surface, at least in the
presence of small vibrations. The reason for this is twofold. First, if the
resulting gait were stable, savings of lower demand of processing
power from the CNS would correspond to a lower energetic cost of
walking (energy optimization) (Alexander 1989). Second, the freed
CNS resources could be allocated to other tasks. Therefore, a step-
transition control law applicable to unperturbed walking is considered.
(7)
Constant-Touchdown-Angle Law
Because the pendulum legs are rigid and of equal length, the legs
(8) must be arranged symmetrically at the transfer between one leg and
the other (Alexander 1995). With regard to Fig. 1, this occurs when
180 2 u uTD (9)
where uTD 5 touchdown angle, i.e., the initial value of u on the next
step, taken to be constant for all steps. Note the 180 angle corresponds
to the constraint of the model because the pendulum is not allowed to
fall below the level of the walking surface, which is considered to be
at. In the simulations, the touchdown angles uTD 5 70 and
uTD 5 72:6 were chosen such that (1) they fall within the range of
values measured for human walking (Lee and Farley 1998), and (2)
the results of simulations of the inverted-pendulum model on sta-
tionary ground yield reasonable gait parameters (e.g., walking speed
and walking frequency). However, to obtain a credible gait, the in-
uence of the initial conditions also had to be examined. Therefore, the
performance of the model was rst mapped for a range of physio-
logically plausible equivalent pendulum lengths and different initial
forward velocities. For each combination of initial conditions, the
simulations were run for 400 steps, conservatively discarding the rst
100 steps to avoid transients. The results for uTD 5 70 are presented
in Fig. 3.
For a representative pedestrian and uTD 5 70, normal walking is
achieved when the model is given an initial velocity of approximately
1:55 m=s. With this velocity, the model quickly converges on the
steady-state motion, and all normal walking parameters are preserved.
JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING ASCE / DECEMBER 2013 / 1339

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Bristol on 11/27/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 3. Map of performance of the model in case of walking on stationary
ground in terms of average walking frequency (black curves, hertz)
and average walking velocity (gray curves with boxed annotations,
kilometers per hour) for a control law based on constant touchdown
angle with uTD 5 70 and for representative pedestrian parameters
Note that the constant touchdown angle foot placement law does
not in fact allow for feedback control. Regardless of the amplitude
and frequency of vibration of the bridge, the foot is always placed at
a constant horizontal distance from the COM (and from the preceding
foot, i.e., constant step length). Nonetheless, this foot-placement law
seems to be simple enough to be consistent with the notion of gait
being passively stable in the sagittal plane (Collins et al. 2005) without
any loss of generality in the case of small bridge vibrations. Mean-
while, the timing of each step is passively modied by the bridge
motion, the time of the foot transition being given when the solution of
Eq. (2) satises Eq. (9).
Initial Conditions on Each Step and Impulses
The velocity of the COM at the end of the step is also modied by the
bridge motion in accordance with Eq. (2). It seems reasonable to
assume that there is some correction of this velocity at the foot
transition. In the absence of any further data on the actual transition
in the presence of perturbations, it is assumed that the initial velocity
on each step is simply reset to the value for walking on stationary
ground. In practice, this task could be performed during the double-
support phase of gait. Hence the initial conditions of u and u_ are the
same on each step.
To make a provision for the force necessary to redirect the COM
to the next pendulum arc, an impulse is applied at the moment of
transition from one supporting leg to the other. The magnitude of
the vertical component of the impulse is given by
In 2mp y_ nf mp x_ 0n1 cot uTD (10)
where In 5 vertical impulse at the end of the nth step; and y and
x 5 vertical and horizontal displacements of the COM, respectively,
such that
y_ nf lu_ n cos180 2 uTD
f
(11)
x_ 0n [ x_ 01 (12)
where the subscripts represent the step number; and the superscripts
0 and f represent the initial and nal values on that step, respectively.
1340 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING ASCE / DECEMBER 2013
J. Bridge Eng. 2013.18:1336-1346.
The impulse contributes to the total self-excited forces in Eqs. (5)
and (6), which become summation terms at the relevant time instants.
Note that the magnitude of the impulse is independent of the adopted
integration interval. In practical implementation of a numerical al-
gorithm, one of the checks of its accuracy can be performed by nding
the average vertical force, including impulses, over the time of the
simulation. Such an average force so obtained should be equal to the
pedestrian weight.
Simulation Period
To determine the magnitude of the long-term average equivalent added
damping and mass, the simulations were run for at least 600 pedestrian
steps. Provision was made for any initial transients to decay; hence the
rst 300 pedestrian steps were conservatively discarded.
The gait derived from the model based on the constant-touchdown
angle was found, in most cases, to be nearly (but not normally exactly)
periodic. This means that small differences in single-step durations
were present as a result of the imposed vertical bridge vibrations.
Therefore, to ensure that in the whole analysis period all possible
phase angles between the bridge and pedestrian were appropriately
accounted for (i.e., in total, there being near-integer numbers of bridge
and pedestrian cycles), the phase angle between the bridge and the
pedestrian, identied from the timing of the instantaneous transfer
from one leg to the other with respect to the beginning of the nearest
preceding bridge vibration cycle [occurring when z 5 0 and z_ is
positive; see Eq. (4) and Fig. 1] in relation to the bridge vibration
period, and the angular velocity of the pedestrian were recorded at
the beginning of the 301st step. The end of the simulation time was
identied when the corresponding values at least 300 steps later were
within 2% of these values.
Results
Truncated time history of the total vertical force (continuous curve
with discontinuous arrowed lines indicating impulses applied at the
transition points between steps) in the presence of sinusoidal bridge
motion (dashed curve; A 5 3 mm, and the bridge vibration fre-
quency fb 5 1:8 Hz) for a model based on representative pedestrian
parameters and uTD 5 70 is presented in Fig. 4. The inuence of the
bridge motion on the vertical force is manifested in misshaped
curvature of the force prole between the instantaneous impulses
applied at the transition points between steps (see Fig. 2), varying
amplitude of these impulses, and altered timing of each consecutive
foot placement in relation to the bridge motion. Note that slow
evolution of the force prole is caused by the close vicinity of the
bridge vibration frequency (1.8 Hz) and the pedestrian mean walking
frequency (1.86 Hz).
The equivalent added damping and mass were found to depend
on frequency and amplitude. Figs. 5(a and b) include results for
A 5 3 mm and A 5 6 mm and the adopted representative pedestrian
parameters, with touchdown angle uTD 5 70 and initial velocity of
1:55 m=s, for which the mean forward velocity on stationary ground
is 1:33 m=s and the pedestrian frequency is 1.86 Hz. Also presented
in Figs. 5(a and b) are results for A 5 3 mm and the adopted
representative pedestrian parameters, but with touchdown angle
uTD 5 72:6 and initial velocity of 1:25 m=s, for which the mean
forward velocity on stationary ground is approximately 1 m=s and
the pedestrian frequency is approximately 1.6 Hz, which is consis-
tent with empirically established frequency-speed relationship for
walking obtained by Bertram and Ruina (2001). The higher forward
velocity is typical for unrestricted walking, whereas the lower ve-
locity is relevant to a moderately dense crowd because the mean
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Bristol on 11/27/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 4. Truncated time history of total vertical force (continuous curve

with discontinuous arrowed lines indicating instantaneous impulses
applied at the transition points between steps) in presence of sinu-
soidal bridge motion (dashed curve; A 5 3 mm and fb 5 1:8 Hz) for
a model based on representative pedestrian parameters uTD 5 70 and
x_ 0n 5 1:55 m=s

pedestrian velocity decreases as crowd density increases [see Fig. 3 in

Bocian et al. (2012)].
According to the current model, the magnitude of the equivalent
added damping and mass is generally larger for lower vibration
amplitudes. It can be seen in Fig. 5 that the pedestrian negative
damping coefcient is negligible for fb  fp . If fb is close to but
lower than jfp , where j is a positive integer, DC is negative,
i.e., detrimental, but it becomes positive, i.e., benecial, when fb
is close to but higher than jfp . The equivalent added mass is close to
the actual pedestrian mass for all frequencies except close to jfp . This
relationship is sustained for the results from all considered values
of initial forward velocity and touchdown angle.
Discussion
The model output has been compared with experimental data avail-
able in the literature. It was necessary to estimate appropriate values of
the model parameters for these comparisons. The relationship be-
tween the walking speed v, walking frequency fp , and step length
d was used: v 5 fp d. In the case of known fp (where reported in the
literature) but unknown v and d, the walking velocity was determined
from the average value identied from 12 subjects by Bertram and
Ruina (2001) for a given fp . Step length was then calculated from the
preceding relationship. The equivalent inverted-pendulum length
l and pedestrian mass mp were taken as equal to the representative
pedestrian parameters adopted in this study. Given the symmetry at the
transfer from one leg to the other (Fig. 1), the touchdown angle was
found from the simple trigonometric relation cos uTD 5 d=2l. This
left only one parameter to be dened, i.e., initial velocity x_ 0n , which was
chosen such that fp from the output of the simulations coincided with
the value observed on the real structure. In the case of known fp and d,
the remaining problem was optimization of the initial velocity x_ 0n in
compliance with the known v.
To date, the most detailed data on the dynamic behavior of
a bridge in the vertical direction under the action of pedestrians come


from the Podgorica Bridge (PB) (Zivanovi c 2012). The vibration
frequency of the fundamental vertical mode of the bridge was
measured at 2.04 Hz and decreased to 2 Hz during the crowd loading
Fig. 5. (a) Equivalent added damping; (b) equivalent added mass for
representative pedestrian, uTD 5 70; x_ 0n 5 1:55 m=s (giving mean
walking velocity of 1:33 m=s and fp 5 1:86 Hz for stationary ground);
A 5 3 mm (black curve and circles); and A 5 6 mm (gray curve and
circles); also presented are results for a representative pedestrian,
uTD 5 72:6; x_ 0n 5 1:25 m=s (giving mean walking velocity of 1 m=s
and fp 5 1:6 Hz for stationary ground); and A 5 3 mm (black curve and
triangles) [dashed horizontal line in (b) denotes pedestrian mass mp ]
tests when the PB vibrated with a displacement amplitude of 2.8 mm
(determined based on peak acceleration of 0:44 m=s2 as averaged
over values of peak acceleration per 150 s obtained from three tests).
The average pedestrian parameters were established as 1.87 Hz for
the average walking frequency and 0.74 m for the average step
length. It was identied that the back-calculated damping ratio of
the relevant bridge mode increased from 0.26 to 0.67% during
tests, suggesting additional benecial damping from the presence
of walkers. The estimated average additional damping coefcient
per pedestrian in this case was between 1,125 and 1,395 Ns=m. The
simulations were run for the same vibratory conditions as measured
during the tests (A 5 2:8 mm and fb 5 2 Hz) and for corresponding
average pedestrian parameters (uTD 5 69:3 and x_ 0n 5 1:6 m=s). The
estimated average equivalent added damping per pedestrian was
504 Ns=m, which is approximately 2.232.77 times smaller than the
back-calculated values obtained from measurements on the PB. The
average equivalent added mass per pedestrian was 33 kg, which is

JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING ASCE / DECEMBER 2013 / 1341

J. Bridge Eng. 2013.18:1336-1346.

 consistent with the measured decrease in the vibration frequency of
the considered mode.
No evidence of benecial pedestrian damping was found by


Zivanovi c et al. (2010) during tests on the Reykjavik City Footbridge
(RCF) for the considered second vertical mode (2.33 Hz). The
displacement amplitude in this case was approximately 0.33 mm
(assuming RMS acceleration of 0:05 m=s2 in the considered mode).
The average pedestrian parameters were established as 1.95 Hz for
average walking frequency and 1:4 m=s for average walking speed.
The simulations were run for the same vibratory conditions as
measured during the tests (A 5 0:33 mm and fb 5 2:33 Hz) and for
corresponding average pedestrian parameters (uTD 5 69:8 and
x_ 0n 5 1:61 m=s). The estimated average equivalent added damping
per pedestrian was 145 Ns=m, and the average equivalent added
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Bristol on 11/27/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
mass per pedestrian was 56 kg. Lack of evidence of increased
damping on the RCF was explained by Zivanovi
c et al. (2010) to be
caused by two factors: insufcient acceleration levels and time of
exposure as a result of the short lengths of the spans on which
measurements were taken. Another possible explanation for the
discrepancy between the measured and expected added damping
might be its dependence on the walking frequency that is captured by
the current model (Fig. 5). However, this issue requires further
investigation based on empirical data.
The presented model is also reasonably consistent with the
results of laboratory investigations on the behavior of a slab sub-
jected to the action of 2, 4, 6, and 10 walking people reported by


Zivanovi c et al. (2009). During testing, the slab with a mass of
approximately 15,000 kg vibrated with a frequency of approxi-
mately 4.45 Hz and a displacement amplitude of approximately
2 mm (based on acceleration amplitudes equal to peak acceleration
levels of 1:85, 1:6, 1:46, and 1:19 m=s2 achieved during testing). It
was identied for all tests that pedestrians acted as a source of
additional benecial damping to the structure, increasing its damping
ratio approximately proportionally to the number of walkers from
0.72% in the case of an empty slab to 2.86% in the case of 10
pedestrians present on the slab. The simulations were run for the
average vibratory conditions measured during testing (A 5 2 mm and
fb 5 4:45 Hz). Given the lack of details regarding the behavior of the
pedestrians and their parameters, model parameters had to be chosen.
C. T. Georgakis (personal communication, 2012) found that during
similar tests on a footbridge set in a laboratory environment, the
preferred pacing rate of pedestrians decreased to 1.38 Hz, and he
attributed this behavior to physical and psychological constraints
associated with a narrow deck and a lack of handrails. It was assumed
herein that pedestrians acted in the same manner during tests con-


ducted by Zivanovi c et al. (2009) and that the average pedestrian
walking frequency matched that measured by Georgakis. Based on
these assumptions and using data from Bertram and Ruina (2001), the
corresponding average pedestrian parameters were established
as uTD 5 74 and x_ 0n 5 1:065 m=s. The estimated average equivalent
added damping per pedestrian was 283 Ns=m, and the average
equivalent added mass per pedestrian was 61 kg. More detailed
comparisons would require further speculations as to the behavior
of pedestrians during testing and therefore are omitted.
Unfortunately, the authors are not aware of any experimental data
in the frequency ranges where the model predicts equivalent nega-
tive damping for further validation of the model.
Note that the peak damping coefcients (Fig. 5) are much larger
in magnitude than the value of 2300 Ns=m proposed by Arup for
lateral bridge vibrations from the behavior of the LMF (Dallard et al.
2001). Hence the estimated effective damping for vertical vibrations
could have a major inuence on bridge behavior. Also note that, on
average, the pedestrians potential to add damping to the bridge is
stronger than the potential to effectively subtract damping. This
1342 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING ASCE / DECEMBER 2013
J. Bridge Eng. 2013.18:1336-1346.
means that for a crowd of walkers with distributed parameters (e.g.,
walking frequency, mass, and leg length), the net effect on the
structure is likely to add damping and increase mass.
Phase Relationships
Another interesting way to look at the results is to analyze phase
angles between the timing of the instantaneous transfer from one leg
to the other and the beginning of the nearest preceding bridge vi-
bration cycle [occurring when z 5 0 and z_ is positive; see Eq. (4) and
Fig. 1] dened here in relation to the bridge vibration period. At this
moment, energy is supplied to or extracted from the structure
through the impulse, ensuring that the motion of the CoM is
redirected to the new pendulum trajectory. The impulses give the
dominant component of the average self-excited forces in the
integrals in Eqs. (5) and (6). An example of the case where fb is
slightly lower than fp is shown in Fig. 6(a), whereas an example of
the case where fb is slightly higher than fp is shown in Fig. 6(b). In
these plots, densication of the phase angles occurs in the vicinity of
p [Fig. 6(a)] and in the vicinity of 0 or 2p [Fig. 6(b)]. For com-
parison, an example where fb is not close to fp or its positive-integer
multiples is shown in Fig. 6(c). The phase angles in this case are
evenly distributed throughout the whole range.
The plots presented in Fig. 6 reveal the reason for the different
effective added damping from the pedestrians in different bridge
frequency ranges. For bridge frequencies far from integer multiples
of the (unperturbed) pedestrian pacing frequency [e.g., Fig. 6(c)], the
step periods are affected little by the bridge motion, and there is
a steadily progressing phase difference between the bridge and
pedestrian, giving an even distribution over all phase angles. Hence,
on some steps, the work done by the pedestrian on the bridge will be
positive, but equally on others steps, it will be negative, so on
average overall there is little work done on the bridge, and the ef-
fective added damping coefcient is close to zero [Fig. 5(a);
fb 5 0:5 Hz).
For bridge frequencies slightly above the (unperturbed) pedes-
trian pacing frequency [e.g., Fig. 6(b)], for phase angles close to zero
(i.e., bridge velocity upward at the beginning of the pedestrian step),
the bridge is generally accelerating downward for the rst half of the
step (u , 90; see Fig. 1) and upward for the second half of the step
(u . 90). Both these bridge accelerations tend to accelerate the
pedestrian motion [see Eq. (2)]. Hence the pedestrian arrives at
the end of the step earlier than for unperturbed walking. Therefore,
the relative phase angle between the bridge and pedestrian pro-
gresses more slowly than otherwise expected. Conversely, for phase
angles close to p at the beginning of the step, the pedestrian motion is
decelerated by the bridge acceleration, and the relative phase angle
progresses more rapidly. Hence there is a concentration of phase
angles close to zero. The principal dynamic load from the pedestrian
is the impulse at the foot transition. For the favored phase re-
lationship, i.e., close to zero, the impulse (downward on the bridge)
occurs when the bridge velocity is upward; hence it has a damping
effect on the bridge motion, so the net DC is positive [Fig. 5(a);
fb 5 1:9 Hz; for x_ 0n 5 1:55 m=s, fp  1:86 Hz]. Similarly, for bridge
frequencies slightly below the (unperturbed) pedestrian pacing
frequency [e.g., Fig. 6(a)], the bridge acceleration modies the
pedestrian step periods so as to concentrate the relative phases near
p, giving net negative effective damping to the bridge [Fig. 5(a);
fb 5 1:8 Hz; for x_ 0n 5 1:55 m=s, fp  1:86 Hz].
The effect of the phase angle between the beginning of step and
the beginning of bridge vibration cycle [occurring when z 5 0 and z_
is positive; see Eq. (4) and Fig. 1], in relation to the bridge vibration
period, on the pedestrian motion is presented in more detail in Fig. 7.
All results were obtained for a model with representative pedestrian
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Bristol on 11/27/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 6. Phase angle between timing of instantaneous transfer from one
leg to the other and beginning of the nearest preceding bridge vibration
cycle [occurring when z 5 0 and z_ is positive; see Eq. (4) and Fig. 1] in
relation to bridge vibration period (after conservatively discarding rst
300 steps, allowing the transients to decay) for a model with repre-
sentative pedestrian parameters uTD 5 70; x_ 0n 5 1:55 m=s (giving mean
walking velocity of 1:33 m=s and fp 5 1:86 Hz for stationary ground);
A 5 3 mm and (a) fb 5 1:8 Hz; (b) fb 5 1:9 Hz; (c) fb 5 0:5 Hz
JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING ASCE / DECEMBER 2013 / 1343
J. Bridge Eng. 2013.18:1336-1346.
Fig. 7. Effect of vertical bridge vibration on pedestrian motion
for a model with representative pedestrian parameters uTD 5 70;
x_ 0n 5 1:55 m=s (giving mean walking velocity of 1:33 m=s and
fp 5 1:86 Hz for stationary ground); A 5 3 mm; and fb 5 1:8 Hz in case
of the initial phase angle between beginning of step and beginning of
bridge vibration cycle of (a) p; (b) 0 [dashed lines denote transition
instants between steps, and uz presented in bottom subplots is the
component of the angular acceleration that depends on bridge accel-
eration (presented in the middle subplots) resolved by a cosine of the leg
inclination angle u (presented in the top subplots) in the equation of
motion uz 5 21=lz cos u; see Eq. (2)]
parameters uTD 5 70(u 2 huTD ; 180+ 2 uTD i), x_ 0n 5 1:55 m=s (giv-
ing a mean velocity of 1:33 m=s and fp 5 1:86 Hz for stationary
ground), A 5 3 mm, and fb 5 1:8 Hz, corresponding to Fig. 6(a). uz
presented in the bottom subplots is the component of the angular
acceleration of the COM that depends on the bridge acceleration
(presented in the middle subplots), resolved by the cosine of the leg
inclination angle u (presented in the top subplots) in the equation of
motion [uz 5 21=lz cos u; see Eq. (2)]. Therefore,
uz modies the
dominant component of the angular acceleration, which depends on
gravity [
ug 5 21=lg cos u; see Eq. (2)], which denes the behavior
of the model in the case of stationary ground. Fig. 7(a) reveals that for
a step starting at a bridge phase angle of p [hence acceleration
z 5 2A sinvb ts 1 p, where ts is the time from the beginning of the
step, as in the middle subplot of Fig. 7(a); see Eq. (4)], the vertical
 vibration of the bridge inuences movement of the pedestrian by
slowing down the progression of the COM because uz is in this case
generally negative. Conversely, Fig. 7(b) reveals that for a step starting
simultaneously with the bridge vibration cycle [phase angle 5 0,
hence acceleration z 5 2A sinvb ts , as in the middle subplot in
Fig. 7(b); see Eq. (4)], the vertical vibration of the bridge inuences
movement of the pedestrian by speeding up progression of the COM
because uz is in this case typically positive. Note that the step duration
expressed as a proportion of the bridge cycle duration, marked in
Fig. 7 by dashed lines that also denote the instant of the impulse
applied at the step transitions, is longer for a phase angle of p [Fig. 7
(a)] than for a phase angle of 0 [Fig. 7(b)]. Hence the phase evolves
more slowly when close to p than when close to 0, giving the bias
toward the phases close to p in Fig. 6(a). Also note that the impulse
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Bristol on 11/27/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

occurring at the step-transition instants is applied when the bridge is

traveling downward [having negative velocity; see Eq. (4)] for the
case when phase angle is p, and hence the pedestrian does positive
work on the bridge and amplies its motion [Fig. 7(a)]. For a phase
angle of 0, the impulse is applied when the bridge is traveling upward
[having positive velocity; see Eq. (4)], and hence the pedestrian does
negative work on the bridge and damps its motion [Fig. 7(b)].
These results and their explanation demonstrate that the effective
added damping from pedestrians can be positive or negative
depending on the relationship between the bridge and pedestrian
frequencies. This occurs as a result of the bridge motion subtly al-
tering the timing of the footfall impulses to bias the net effect.
For some combinations of vibration and walking frequencies,
when the walking frequency is very close to integer multiples of the
vibration frequency, the model can yield pedestrian motion syn-
chronized with the bridge, although this is not a necessary condition
for the pedestrian to have a (positive or negative) damping effect on
the bridge. The cases where synchronization occurs for fp 5 1:86 Hz
on stationary ground and fb is close to this value are shown in Fig. 8,
which is a zoomed view of part of Fig. 5. The tendency to synchronize
is greater for larger amplitudes of vibration. For example, in Fig. 8, for
a vibration amplitude of 3 mm, synchronization occurs within the Fig. 8. Zoom of Fig. 5 for bridge frequencies close to pedestrian
bridge vibration frequency range of 1.851.88 Hz, whereas doubling frequency showing cases when synchronization occurs (open circles
the vibration amplitude broadens this range to 1.831.9 Hz. A record mark cases where no synchronization occurs, whereas lled circles mark
of occurrences of synchronization of pedestrians to the vertical ground cases where synchronization is evident): (a) equivalent added damping;
motion reported in the past has been compiled by Willford (2002) and (b) equivalent added mass based on simulations for representative
includes cases described in Bachmann and Ammann (1987) and pedestrian; uTD 5 70, x_ 0n 5 1:55 m=s (giving mean walking velocity of
Grundmann et al. (1993). The current model is able to capture this 1:33 m=s and fp 5 1:86 Hz for stationary ground); A 5 3 mm (black
behavior and predicts an increasing tendency toward synchronization curve); and A 5 6 mm (gray curve) [dashed horizontal line in (b) denotes
with larger amplitudes of vibration. pedestrian mass mp ]

Model Limitations and Other Effects

It must be kept in mind that the results presented herein are the
average values expected over a long time. For short periods of ex-
posure (e.g., for individual pedestrians passing over short bridges),
the bridge response might vary considerably from one pedestrian
crossing to another. This is not to say that the underlying effects of
the pedestrian are different but that force from the pedestrian can
effectively excite or dampen the bridge over short periods. However,
it is expected that for a group or crowd of walkers with the same
parameters, the results would converge to the average values pre-
sented herein. Note that a similar line of argument was adopted by
Dallard et al. (2001) in the derivation of the stability criterion based
on the average negative damping coefcient per pedestrian from
results of tests on the LMF laterally excited by a crowd of walkers.
The rigid inverted-pendulum pedestrian model subjected to ver-
tical excitation of the supporting surface has been considered with
a simple control law based on an assumption that the pedestrian will
try to compensate for the COM trajectory disturbance by fully
restoring the velocity at the moment of transition from one to the next
step to the characteristic value for unperturbed walking. However, in
real gait, this task, performed mostly during the double-support phase,
is unlikely to be executed perfectly. Therefore, although this model
indicates that the pedestrian-equivalent added damping and mass
potentially can be either positive or negative in different conditions,
the quantitative results should be treated with care. The results are in
fact quite sensitive to the control law used for the transition from one
foot to the other, so this aspect of human behavior needs further
consideration.
The results are sensitive to the walking frequency, which is de-
termined by the initial velocity, touchdown angle, and equivalent
pendulum length. For the current model, different walking fre-
quencies produce similar patterns of the equivalent added damping
and mass to those presented in Fig. 5 but shifted to the corresponding
walking frequency and its harmonics.
The results presented herein are typical for normal, i.e., un-
constrained, walking and walking in moderately dense crowds. Lower

1344 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING ASCE / DECEMBER 2013

J. Bridge Eng. 2013.18:1336-1346.

 average velocities and walking frequencies would be more relevant to
loading from a dense crowd because the mean pedestrian velocity
(hence walking frequency) decreases considerably as crowd density
increases. To calibrate the model for such conditions, the initial ve-
locity x_ 0n and the touchdown angle uTD would need to be changed
because they are known to depend on walking velocity. Furthermore,
for low speeds, the mechanics of walking change in that the duration of
the double-support phase of gait increases, and hence inclusion of this
feature might be necessary.
Other signicant factors that could improve the model are the
inherent body damping, leg compliance, and motion of the swing
leg. It is well known that the human body exhibits certain resonant
characteristics and internal damping that depend on posture. For
example, during whole-body vertical vibrations of standing sub-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Bristol on 11/27/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
jects, support conditions, such as knee postures and whether one or
two feet are in contact with the ground, have been found to inuence
the resonant frequency of the apparent mass. The main resonance of
a standing human exposed to 1 m=s2 (RMS) vibrations occurs at
5.5 Hz and decreases to 3.75 Hz in the case of standing on one leg and
to 2.75 Hz for a posture in which both legs are bent and in contact
with the ground (Matsumoto and Grifn 1998). Such effects could
be represented by changes in the stiffness and damping of the SMD
human models (Matsumoto and Grifn 2003). Hence, to fully
capture the damping effect of walking pedestrians on the supporting
structure, it may be necessary to include such features along with the
bipedal behavior considered here. This could be achieved, for ex-
ample, by adding a spring and a dashpot damper to the current model.
However, importantly, the current model demonstrates that sig-
nicant effective damping of the structure can arise as a result of the
simple bipedal mechanics of walking, without considering the internal
dynamic characteristics of the human body. Therefore, any model of
the human-structure interaction from walking pedestrians should take
into account the stepping behavior and its modication by bridge
motion. Furthermore, currently used models of human dynamic loading
neglect this effect, which could signicantly affect the resulting struc-
tural response amplitudes.
Conclusions
This paper presents results of a study on interactions between a walking
pedestrian and a vertically oscillating structure. It has been shown that
the pedestrian has a potential to act as a source of either positive or
negative equivalent added damping and mass to the structure depending
on the system parameters. However, the net expected effect from a group
of pedestrians with distributed parameters is likely to be an increase in
effective damping and mass. A possible subtle entrainment mechanism
has been identied that, depending on the pedestrian-to-bridge fre-
quency ratio, could be responsible for providing negative or positive
damping without necessarily involving full synchronization of the pe-
destrian to the bridge frequency. The key nding is that signicant ef-
fective damping and variations in effective mass of the structure resulting
from pedestrians can arise from their stepping behavior, which has not
been considered previously. This is apart from any effects of resonances
or internal damping of the human body. However, improvements to the
model, based on experimental observations of human gait, are needed to
build a more reliable fundamental pedestrian model.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by an Engineering and Physical Sciences
Research Council (EPSRC) Doctoral Training Account studentship
for Mateusz Bocian and an EPSRC Advanced Research Fellowship
for John H. G. Macdonald.
JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING ASCE / DECEMBER 2013 / 1345
J. Bridge Eng. 2013.18:1336-1346.
References
Alexander, N. A. (2006). Theoretical treatment of crowd-structure in-
teraction dynamics. Proc., ICE Struct. Build., 159(6), 329338.
Alexander, R. M. (1989). Optimization and gaits in the locomotion of
vertebrates. Physiol. Rev., 69(4), 11991227.
Alexander, R. M. (1992). A model of bipedal locomotion on compliant
legs. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B, 338(1284), 189198.
Alexander, R. M. (1995). Simple models of human movement. Appl.
Mech. Rev., 48(8), 461469.
Alexander, R. M. (2003). Principles of animal locomotion, Princeton
University Press, Woodstock, U.K.
Bachmann, H., and Ammann, W. (1987). Vibrations in structures induced
by man and machines, 3rd Ed., International Association for Bridge and
Structural Engineering (IABSE), Zurich, Switzerland.
Barker, C. (2002). Some observations on the nature of the mechanism that
drives the self-excited lateral response of footbridges. Proc., Foot-
bridge 2002: 1st Int. Conf., Paris.
Bertram, J. A. E., and Ruina, A. (2001). Multiple walking speed-frequency
relations are predicted by constraint optimization. J. Theor. Biol.,
209(4), 445453.
Bocian, M., Macdonald, J. H. G., and Burn, J. F. (2012). Biomechanically
inspired modelling of pedestrian-induced forces on laterally oscillating
structures. J. Sound Vibrat., 331(16), 39143929.
British Standards Institution (BSI). (2003). UK national annex to Eurocode
1: Actions on structures. 2: Trafc loads on bridges, London.
Brownjohn, J. M. W., Fok, P., Roche, M., and Omenzetter, P. (2004). Long
span steel pedestrian bridge at Singapore Changi Airport. 2: Crowd loading
tests and vibration mitigation measures. Struct. Eng., 82(16), 2834.
Butz, C., et al. (2008). Advanced load models for synchronous pedestrian
excitation and optimised design guidelines for steel footbridges. RFSR-
CT-2003-00019, European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.
Caprani, C. C., Keogh, J., Archbold, P., and Fanning, P. (2011). Char-
acteristic vertical response of a footbridge due to crowd loading. Proc.,
Eurodyn 2011: 8th Int. Conf. on Structural Dynamics, 978985.
Collins, S., Ruina, A., Tedrake, R., and Wisse, M. (2005). Efcient bipedal
robots based on passive-dynamic walkers. Science, 307(5712), 1082
1085.
Dallard, P., et al. (2001). The London Millennium Footbridge. Struct.
Eng., 79(22), 1733.
Danbon, F., and Grillaud, G. (2005). Dynamic behaviour of a steel foot-
bridge: Characterisation and modelling of the dynamic loading induced
by a moving crowd on the Solferino Footbridge in Paris. Proc.,
Footbridge 2008: 2nd Int. Conf., Porto, Portugal.
Grifn, M. J. (1990). Handbook of human vibration, Academic Press,
London.
Grundmann, H., Kreuzinger, H., and Schneider, M. (1993). Schwin-
gungsuntersuchungen fr Fugngerbrcken [Vibration tests of pe-
destrian bridges]. Der Bauingenieur, 68, 215225 (in German).
Hof, A. L. (2008). The extrapolated center of mass concept suggests
a simple control of balance in walking. Hum. Mov. Sci., 27(1), 112125.
Hof, A. L., Gazendam, M. G. J., and Sinke, W. E. (2005). The condition
for dynamic stability. J. Biomech., 38(1), 18.
Inglfsson, E. T., Georgakis, C. T., Ricciardelli, F., and Jnsson, J. (2011).
Experimental identication of pedestrian-induced lateral forces on
footbridges. J. Sound Vibrat. 330(6), 12651284.
Inglfsson, E. T., Georgakis, C. T., and Svendsen, M. N. (2008). Vertical
footbridge vibrations: Details regarding and experimental validation of the
response spectrum methodology. Proc., Footbridge 2008: 3rd Int. Conf.,
Porto, Portugal.
Inman, V. T., Ralston, H. J., and Todd, F. (1981). Human walking, Williams
& Wilkins, Baltimore.
Institution of Structural Engineers (ISE). (2008). Dynamic performance
requirements for permanent grandstands subject to crowd action:
Recommendations for management, design and assessment, London.
International Federation for Structural Concrete (b). (2005). Guidelines
for the design of footbridges. b Bull. 32, Lausanne, Switzerland.
 International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (1981). Vibration
and shock: Mechanical driving point impedance of the human body.
ISO 5982-1981, Geneva.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2007). Bases for
design of structures: Serviceability of buildings and walkways against
vibrations. ISO 10137:2007, Geneva.
Kim, S. H., Cho, K. I., Choi, M. S., and Lim, J. Y. (2008). Development of
human body model for the dynamic analysis of footbridges under pe-
destrian induced excitation. Int. J. Steel Struct., 8(4), 333345.
Kuo, A. D. (2007). The six determinants of gait and the inverted pendulum
analogy: A dynamic walking perspective. Hum. Mov. Sci., 26(4), 617656.
Lee, C. R., and Farley, C. T. (1998). Determinants of the center of mass
trajectory in human walking and running. J. Exp. Biol., 201(21), 2935
2944.
Macdonald, J. H. G. (2008). Pedestrian-induced vibrations of the Clifton
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Bristol on 11/27/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Suspension Bridge, UK. Proc. ICE Bridge Eng., 161(2), 6977.
Macdonald, J. H. G. (2009). Lateral excitation of bridges by balancing
pedestrians. Proc. R. Soc. A, 465(2104), 10551073.
Masani, K., Kouzaki, M., and Fukunaga, T. (2002). Variability of ground re-
action forces during treadmill walking. J. Appl. Physiol., 92(5), 18851890.
MATLAB 7.8.0.347 [Computer software]. Natick, MA, MathWorks.
Matsumoto, Y., and Grifn, M. J. (1998). Dynamic response of the standing
human body exposed to vertical vibration: Inuence of posture and
vibration magnitude. J. Sound Vibrat., 212(1), 85107.
Matsumoto, Y., and Grifn, M. J. (2003). Mathematical models for the
apparent masses of standing subjects exposed to vertical whole-body
vibration. J. Sound Vibrat., 260(3), 431451.
McGeer, T. (1990). Passive dynamic walking. Int. J. Robot. Res., 9(2),
6282.
Mochon, S., and McMahon, T. A. (1980). Ballistic walking. J. Biomech.,
13(1), 4957.
National Health Service (NHS). (2009). Health survey for England: 2008
trend tables, London.
1346 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING ASCE / DECEMBER 2013
J. Bridge Eng. 2013.18:1336-1346.
OConnor, S. M., and Kuo, A. D. (2009). Direction-dependent control of
balance during walking and standing. J. Neurophysiol., 102(3), 14111419.
Pachi, A., and Ji, T. (2005). Frequency and velocity of people walking.
Struct. Eng., 83(3), 3640.
Pandy, M. G. (2003). Simple and complex models for studying muscle
function in walking. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B, 358(1437), 1501
1509.
Pheasant, S. T. (1982). Anthropometric estimates for British civilian
adults. Ergonomics, 25(11), 9931001.
Pizzimenti, A. D., and Ricciardelli, F. (2005). Experimental evaluation of
the dynamic lateral loading of footbridges by walking pedestrians.
Proc., Footbridge 2005: 2nd Int. Conf., Venice, Italy.
Racic, V., Pavic, A., and Brownjohn, J. M. W. (2009). Experimental
identication and analytical modelling of human walking forces: Lit-
erature review. J. Sound Vibrat., 326(12), 149.
Tavares da Silva, F., and Pimentel, R. L. (2011). Biodynamic walking
model for vibration serviceability of footbridges in vertical direction.
Proc., Eurodyn 2011: 8th Int. Conf. on Structural Dynamics, 10901096.
Technical Department for Transport, Roads and Bridges Engineering and
Road Safety/French Association of Civil Engineering (SETRA/AFGC).
(2006) Footbridges: Assessment of vibrational behaviour of footbridges
under pedestrian loading. Technical Guide 0611, Paris.
Willford, M. (2002). Dynamic actions and reactions of pedestrians. Proc.,
Footbridge 2002: 1st Int. Conf., Paris.


Zivanovic, S. (2012). Benchmark footbridge for vibration serviceability
assessment under the vertical component of pedestrian load. J. Struct.
Eng., 138(10), 11931202.


Zivanovic, S., Daz, I. M., and Pavic, A. (2009). Inuence of walking and
standing crowds on structural dynamic properties. Proc., IMAC-XXVII:
Conf. and Exposition on Structural Dynamics: Model Verication and
Validation, Society for Experimental Mechanics, Bethel, CT.


Zivanovic, S., Pavic, A., and Inglfsson, E. T. (2010). Modeling spatially
unrestricted pedestrian trafc on footbridges. J. Struct. Eng., 136(10),
12961308.