progressive damage test - vce

1
supported by the European Commission www.vce.at/iris/ Project – S101 Flyover Reibersdorf Damage Initial condition after 50 years of service life Progressive Damage Test 1 2 4 Effects of KPIs 3 www.vce.at Progressive Damage Test S101 Flyover Reibersdorf Trend of Eigenfrequencies 3a Lifeline 3b Mode Shapes 3c Dissipation of induced vibration 3d 3 Trend of Eigenfrequencies 3a 3b Lifeline 3c Mode Shapes 3d Damping Effects of KPIs North South Tendon cutting Pier settlement Demolition 4 Progressive Damage Test Pier settlement 2a Tendon cutting 2b 2 Initial condition after 50 years of service life 1 2a Pier settlement 2b Tendon cutting 1,50 56,0 51,0 46,0 41,0 36,0 31,0 26,0 16,0 11,0 6,0 21,0 1,25 1,00 0,75 0,50 0,25 0,00 Station [m] Damping [%] North South 8,00 56,0 51,0 46,0 41,0 36,0 31,0 26,0 16,0 11,0 6,0 21,0 7,00 6,00 5,00 4,00 3,00 2,00 1,00 0,00 Station [m] Damping [%] North South 11,00 56,0 51,0 46,0 41,0 36,0 31,0 26,0 16,0 11,0 6,0 21,0 10,00 9,00 8,00 7,00 6,00 5,00 4,00 3,00 2,00 1,00 0,00 Station [m] Damping [%] North South Undamaged condition Pier settlement (3 cm) 4th tendon cut through Evident redistribution of available integrity 56,0 46,0 36,0 26,0 16,0 6,0 0,00 0,50 1,00 1,50 -0,50 North South 0,00 0,50 1,00 1,50 -0,50 -1,00 0,00 1,00 -2,00 56,0 46,0 36,0 26,0 16,0 6,0 0,00 0,50 1,00 1,50 -0,50 North South 0,00 0,50 1,00 1,50 -0,50 -1,00 0,00 1,00 -2,00 56,0 46,0 36,0 26,0 16,0 6,0 0,00 0,50 1,00 1,50 -0,50 North South 0,00 0,50 1,00 1,50 -0,50 -1,00 0,00 1,00 -2,00 Undamaged condition 1 st bending mode – main span 1 st torsional mode – main span 2 nd bending mode – main span Pier settlement (3 cm) 4 th tendon cut through 4.05 Hz 6.30 Hz 9.69 Hz 3.62 Hz 5.39 Hz 8.22 Hz 4.04 Hz 6.18 Hz 9.67 Hz 10 4 th tendon partially intersected 20 30 40 50 60 70 Compensation plates inserted Start of cutting through the pier End of damage test lowering the pier Second cut is finished 3 rd tendon intersected 2 nd tendon intersected 1 st tendon intersected 3 rd step of lowering 2 nd step of lowering 1 st step of lowering -18,1% -16,8% -11,2% -5,6% The flyover S101 is a typical prestressed concrete bridge from the early 1960ies. It was decided to replace it as the structure did not fit into the overall traffic and infrastructure concept anymore – the bridge did not meet the current requirements in terms of sufficient carrying capacity. During the IRIS project VCE (together with the University of Tokyo) took the opportunity of this certain damage test to demonstrate the benefit of monitoring, offering a broadened insight and reduced uncertainties in order to support the decision processes of infrastructure owners. The major objective of the current progressive damage test was to emphasize refined methods for the analysis of upcoming, slowly progressing damage and its effects on parameters of dynamic response. age [year] 1960 1970 2060 2050 2040 2070 2030 2020 2010 2020 1990 1980 2080 1 2 3 4 5 Demolition

Upload: others

Post on 04-Dec-2021

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Progressive Damage Test - VCE

supported by the European Commission

www.vce.at/iris/

Project – S101 Flyover Reibersdorf

Damage

Initial condition after 50 years of service life Progressive Damage Test1 2

4

Effects of KPIs3

www.vce.at

Progressive Damage Test S101 Flyover Reibersdorf

Trend of Eigenfrequencies3a Lifeline3b

Mode Shapes3c Dissipation of induced vibration3d

3

Trend of Eigenfrequencies

3a 3b

Lifeline3c

Mode Shapes

3d

Damping

Effects of KPIs

North SouthTendon cutting

Pier settlement

Demolition4

Progressive Damage Test

Piersettlement

2aTendoncutting

2b

2Initial condition

after 50 yearsof service life

1

2a Pier settlement

2b Tendon cutting

1,5056,0 51,0 46,0 41,0 36,0 31,0 26,0 16,0 11,0 6,021,0

1,25

1,00

0,75

0,50

0,25

0,00

Station [m]

Dam

ping

[%]

North South

8,0056,0 51,0 46,0 41,0 36,0 31,0 26,0 16,0 11,0 6,021,0

7,00

6,00

5,00

4,00

3,00

2,00

1,00

0,00

Station [m]

Dam

ping

[%]

North South

11,0056,0 51,0 46,0 41,0 36,0 31,0 26,0 16,0 11,0 6,021,0

10,009,008,007,006,005,004,003,002,001,000,00

Station [m]

Dam

ping

[%]

North South

Undamaged condition Pier settlement (3 cm) 4th tendon cut through

Evident redistribution of available integrity

56,0 46,0 36,0 26,0 16,0 6,0

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

-0,50

North South

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

-0,50

-1,00

0,00

1,00

-2,00

56,0 46,0 36,0 26,0 16,0 6,0

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

-0,50

North South

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

-0,50

-1,00

0,00

1,00

-2,00

56,0 46,0 36,0 26,0 16,0 6,0

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

-0,50

North South

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

-0,50

-1,00

0,00

1,00

-2,00

Undamaged condition

1st bending mode – main span

1st torsional mode – main span

2nd bending mode – main span

Pier settlement (3 cm) 4th tendon cut through

4.05 Hz

6.30 Hz

9.69 Hz

3.62 Hz

5.39 Hz

8.22 Hz

4.04 Hz

6.18 Hz

9.67 Hz

10

4th tendon partially intersected

20 30 40 50 60 70

Compensation plates inserted

Start of cutting through the pier

End of damage test lowering the pier

Second cut is finished

3rd tendon intersected

2nd tendon intersected

1st tendon intersected

3rd step of lowering

2nd step of lowering

1st step of lowering

-18,1%-16,8%

-11,2%-5,6%

The flyover S101 is a typical prestressed concrete bridge from the early 1960ies. It was decided to replace it as the structure did not fit into the overall traffic and infrastructure concept anymore – the bridge did not meet the current requirements in terms of sufficient carrying capacity.

During the IRIS project VCE (together with the University of Tokyo) took the opportunity of this certain damage test to demonstrate the benefit of monitoring, offering a broadened insight and reduced uncertainties in order to support the decision processes of infrastructure owners.

The major objective of the current progressive damage test was to emphasize refined methods for the analysis of upcoming, slowly progressing damage and its effects on parameters of dynamic response.

age [year]

1960 1970 206020502040 2070203020202010202019901980 2080

1

2

3

4

5

Demolition

To assess the lifetime of a structure several assumptions have to be made. Models and parameters have to be estimated and the risk or a equivalent rating factor has to be calculated.