Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

In-service bridge SHM point arrangement with consideration of structural robustness

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To date, structural health monitoring (SHM) has been used in several long-span bridges and even some middle-span bridges. Many monitoring sensors are usually arranged based on traditional structural mechanical analysis, such as load tests and engineering experiences. Moreover, several studies have also been carried out to reduce the number of monitoring sensor deployments and improve the pertinence of monitoring sensor arrangements. One example is structural robustness analysis, which can be used to locate the vulnerable and weak parts of a bridge to determine the arrangement of SHM sensors. In this paper, a strain energy index is first proposed to evaluate structural robustness. The universal applicability of the evaluation index is also verified by energy principle, and then this index can be widely accepted for engineering applications. A theoretical numerical simulation of the structural robustness of a simply supported beam subjected to different damage effects is then carried out. Different damage locations, different damage degrees and different moving speeds are considered. With the consideration of the same structural type, an in-service simply supported girder bridge is also presented as the verification case study. The bridge once experienced an explosion caused by a moving fireworks vehicle. The monitoring point arrangement based on load tests and engineering experiences can be verified to be highly consistent with the theoretical numerical simulation result. This study provides a method for the SHM point arrangement of this kind of bridge. The structural robustness strain energy evaluation index is also acceptable for other kinds of bridges. The inconvenience caused by traditional structural analysis, such as the temporary closing of road traffic, can also be greatly reduced.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nikos GP, Bartlomiej B, George DH, Andrzej S (2016) Wavelet analysis based damage localization in steel frames with bolted connections. Smart Struct Syst 18:1189–1202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Pnevmatikos N, Hatzigeorgiou G (2016) Damage detection of frame structures subjected to earthquake excitation using discrete wavelet analysis. Bull Earthq Eng 15:227–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Pnevmatikos N (2010) Damage detection of structures using discrete wavelet transform. In: Fifth world conference on structural control and monitoring (5WCSCM), Japan

  4. Yu G (2009) Structural vulnerability analysis and its application in bridge health monitoring. Tongji University, China

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kammer DC (1991) Sensor placement for on-orbit modal identification and correlation of large space structures. J Guid Control Dyn 14:251–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Yan Y, Yam L (2002) Optimal design of number and locations of actuators in active vibration control of a space truss. Smart Mater Struct 11:496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Meo M, Zumpano G (2005) On the optimal sensor placement techniques for a bridge structure. Eng Struct 27:1488–1497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Rao ARM, Anandakumar G (2007) Optimal placement of sensors for structural system identification and health monitoring using a hybrid swarm intelligence technique. Smart Mater Struct 16:26–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Flynn EB, Todd MD (2010) A Bayesian approach to optimal sensor placement for structural health monitoring with application to active sensing. Mech Syst Signal Process 24:891–903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Guratzsch RF, Mahadevan S (2010) Structural health monitoring sensor placement optimization under uncertainty. AIAA J 48:1281–1289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Yi TH, Li HN, Gu M (2011) Optimal sensor placement for structural health monitoring based on multiple optimization strategies. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 20:881–900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Huang JJ, Li J, Francis TKA (2010) Establishment of bridge rating systems for Ting Kau Bridge. Hong Kong University, Hong Kong

    Google Scholar 

  13. Wong KY (2006) Criticality and vulnerability analysis of Tsing Ma Bridge. In: Proceedings of the international bridge conference on bridge engineering: challenges in the 21st century, Hong Kong Institution of Engineers

  14. Moses F (1986) Optimum design, redundancy and reliability of structural system. Comput Struct 24:239–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Frangopol DM, Curley JP (1987) Effects of damage and redundancy on structural reliability. J Struct Eng 113:1533–1549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ye LP, Lin XC, Qu Z, Lu XZ, Pan P (2010) Evaluating method of element importance of structural system. J Arch Civ Eng 27:1–6

    Google Scholar 

  17. Starossek U, Haberland M (2011) Approaches to measures of structural robustness. Struct Infrastruct Eng 7:625–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhu BJ, Frangopol DM (2015) Reliability, redundancy and risk as performance indicators of structural systems during their life-cycle. Eng Struct 41:34–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jin QW, Ren WX, Liu Z (2018) Relationship and sensitivity study of structural robustness and vulnerability with the consideration of strain energy. In: The 15th international symposium on structural engineering, China

  20. Ren WX, Jin QW (2018) Structural robustness, redundancy, and vulnerability. J Harbin Inst Technol 50:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  21. Dagang L, Song P, Cui S, Wang M (2011) Structural robustness and its assessment indicators. J Build Struct 32:44–54

    Google Scholar 

  22. Xu N (2014) Vulnerability analysis of frame structures based on flow potential. Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China

    Google Scholar 

  23. Wang TN, Zhang L, Zhang HL (2013–2015) Test reports of Yi Chang Bridge, Henan Transportation Research Institute CO., LTD, China

Download references

Acknowledgements

The support from Henan Transportation Research Institute CO., LTD and Chinese National Key Research and Development Project (Grant no. 2016YFC0701400) is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Civil Engineering, Hefei University of Technology, 193 Tunxi Road, Hefei, China

    Qiwen Jin

  2. School of Engineering, University of British Columbia, 3333 University Way, Kelowna, Canada

    Zheng Liu

Authors
  1. Qiwen Jin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zheng Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qiwen Jin.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jin, Q., Liu, Z. In-service bridge SHM point arrangement with consideration of structural robustness. J Civil Struct Health Monit 9, 543–554 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-019-00350-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-019-00350-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation