2007
DOI: 10.1061/(asce)1084-0702(2007)12:5(662)
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tanaro Bridge: Dynamic Tests on a Couple of Spans

Abstract: The Tanaro Bridge, an 18-span 225-m long bridge on the Tanaro River in northwestern Italy, presented the following elements of interest: ͑1͒ the barrel divided into adjacent arches; and ͑2͒ transverse tie bars and internal spandrels connecting the three parts of the barrels. Its demolition, in 2003, gave the opportunity of performing dynamic tests on a couple of spans at two stages of demolition: ͑1͒ fill removed; and ͑2͒ fill and internal spandrels removed. Without the uncertain contribution of the fill, some… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For these reasons, finite elements (FE) and macro-elements are often preferred for the seismic assessment of real case studies in the current practice. 2D and 3D FE models (Pelà et al, 2013) allow for representing the effect of fill soil, spandrel walls and backings on the dynamic behaviour of the bridge, as revealed by field testing and dynamic monitoring (Brencich and Sabia, 2007;Mautner and Reiterer, 2007). Nevertheless, the high computational effort required by 3D FE models for time-step simulations makes them unfeasible for applications to large multi-span bridges, especially in current design practice.…”
Section: Seismic Assessment Approachesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For these reasons, finite elements (FE) and macro-elements are often preferred for the seismic assessment of real case studies in the current practice. 2D and 3D FE models (Pelà et al, 2013) allow for representing the effect of fill soil, spandrel walls and backings on the dynamic behaviour of the bridge, as revealed by field testing and dynamic monitoring (Brencich and Sabia, 2007;Mautner and Reiterer, 2007). Nevertheless, the high computational effort required by 3D FE models for time-step simulations makes them unfeasible for applications to large multi-span bridges, especially in current design practice.…”
Section: Seismic Assessment Approachesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Static and dynamic load test is a part of acceptance procedure for new bridges in Latvia and in many other countries around the world (Burdet, Corthay 1995;Karoumi, Andersson 2007;Cunha et al 2008;Brencic, Sabia 2007;Akimovs, Paeglītis 2008;Paeglite, Paeglitis 2013). The bridge load testing in Latvia is performed according to the requirements of the national standard LVS 190-11: 2009.…”
Section: Dynamic Load Testingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the model formulation must be appropriate enough to characterize the actual structure. [5][6][7][8][9][10] In the data-driven approach, no assumptions are made about the mechanism underlying the experimental data. The model selected for describing the relevant characteristics of the system is built on top of the data and has not any specific physical meaning (e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the model formulation must be appropriate enough to characterize the actual structure. 510…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%