2011
DOI: 10.1080/15732470903017240
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dynamical identification and modelling of steel–concrete composite high-speed railway bridges

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In a first approach the additional damping introduced by the track elements is therefore neglected, which is also in accordance with previous works [5,11,12]. The modal damping obtained in the experimental campaign was assigned to the paired numerical modes, for the other modes of frequencies up to 30 Hz a value of 1.56% is assumed (Eurocode value [1]).…”
Section: Bridge Response Under Railway Trafficmentioning
confidence: 73%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In a first approach the additional damping introduced by the track elements is therefore neglected, which is also in accordance with previous works [5,11,12]. The modal damping obtained in the experimental campaign was assigned to the paired numerical modes, for the other modes of frequencies up to 30 Hz a value of 1.56% is assumed (Eurocode value [1]).…”
Section: Bridge Response Under Railway Trafficmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…Regarding the comparison between the response predicted by the three numerical approaches, it is noticeable that the model that considers both the longitudinal and transverse coupling between decks (DDDS model) predicts the frequency contributions in the range [10][11][12][13][14][15] Hz with higher accuracy, but the three of them overestimate the contribution of the fundamental mode in the response. The authors consider that the additional damping induced by the track elements, that is neglected in this preliminary study and also the effect of the train-bridge interaction, could be responsible of the differences and needs to be investigated in a future work.…”
Section: Bridge Response Under Railway Trafficmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Continuous track models permit considering the composite action between the track and the bridge associated to the transmission of shear stress between the deck and the rails through the ballast. In these models, the ballast is generally represented as a continuum and is discretised into solid FE [24][25][26], admitting elastic and isotropic constant material properties. Additionally, in the ballast regions located at the joints between consecutive spans or decks, a few researchers propose the use of degraded material properties to take into account the possible loss of stiffness of the ballast due to the cyclic movement caused by passing trains [27,28].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A different approach was used in Liu, Reynders, De Roeck, and Lombaert (2008), Chellini, Nardini, and Salvatore (2011), Ribeiro, Calc ada, Delgado, Brehm, and Zabel (2012) and Malveiro, Ribeiro, Calcada, and Delgado (2013). In all these works, 3D finite element models of railway bridges were developed using solid, shell and beam elements for the bridge and isotropic elastic solid elements for the ballast.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%