Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Vortrag (37)
- Beitrag zu einem Tagungsband (24)
- Zeitschriftenartikel (16)
- Beitrag zu einem Sammelband (3)
- Buchkapitel (1)
- Posterpräsentation (1)
Schlagworte
- Ground vibration (20)
- Hammer impact (8)
- Train passage (8)
- Building vibration (7)
- Layered soil (7)
- Train-induced ground vibration (7)
- Bahnerschütterungen (6)
- Slab track (6)
- Vibration measurements (6)
- Layered soils (5)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
- 7.2 Ingenieurbau (82) (entfernen)
Eingeladener Vortrag
- nein (37)
The dynamic behaviour of slab and ballast tracks has been investigated by measurements and calculations. Hammer impacts and train passages have been analysed. Measurements have been performed by geophones (velocity transducers) which have been time-integrated to displacements. The calculations are done in frequency-wavenumber domain for multi-beam-on-continuous soil models. The characteristics of the different tracks and track elements have been established in theory and experiment. The frequency-dependent compliances (displacement transfer functions) show clear rail-on-rail-pad resonances or highly damped track-soil resonances. Compared to the rail and sleeper, the track plate has much lower amplitudes. The slab track has usually the highest rail amplitudes due to soft rail pads. The train passage yields track displacements which are a superposition of the axle loads from the two neighbouring axles of a bogie and from the two bogies of two neighbouring carriages. This global behaviour is characteristic for the track plate of the slab track whereas the rails of the slab and the ballast track behave more local with only one bogie of influence. The measurements agree very well with the theory of the continuous soil in case of the six measured slab tracks and acceptably well for the six measured ballast tracks. The measurements allow to find appropriate model parameters and to check the models, for example the Winkler model of the soil has been found less appropriate as it reacts more locally.
Usually, geometric irregularities are considered as the main cause of ground vibrations from trains. A varying stiffness of the track, the track support and the soil can also generate ground vibrations. The regular stiffness variation of the track on and between the sleepers results in a deterministic dynamic axle load. The random stiffness variation of the track support yields also dynamic axle loads. The dynamic axle loads are generated by the varying wheel displacements under the static axle load by the acceleration of the unsprung mass of the rail vehicle. The random stiffness variation has a second effect. The pulses from the passage of the static axle loads are superposed regularly to the quasi-static response, but also irregularly to yield a “scattered” part of the axle pulses. The same holds for a random variation of the soil stiffness. All these effects of stiffness variations have been calculated by wavenumber-domain multi-beam track models, a random finite-element soil model and the superposition of axle impulses in a stochastic simulation. The results are confronted with many measurements at different sites. It is concluded that the stiffness variation of the track and the soil generate an important ground vibration component near railway lines.
Usually, geometric irregularities are considered as the main cause of ground vibrations from trains. A varying stiffness of the track, the track support and the soil can also generate ground vibrations. The regular stiffness variation of the track on and between the sleepers results in a deterministic dynamic axle load. The random stiffness variation of the track support yields also dynamic axle loads which are generated by the acceleration of the unsprung mass (from the varying wheel displacements under the static axle load). The random stiffness variation has a second effect. The pulses from the passage of the static axle loads are superposed regularly to the quasi-static response, but also irregularly to yield a “scattered” part of the axle pulses. The same holds for a random variation of the soil stiffness. All these effects of stiffness variations have been calculated by wavenumber-domain multi-beam track models, a random finite-element soil model and the superposition of axle impulses in a stochastic simulation. The results are confronted with many measurements at different sites. It is concluded that the stiffness variation of the track and the soil generate an important ground vibration component near railway lines.
Dieser Vortrag präsentiert einige Prinzipien und einige Beispiele zur Minderung von Eisenbahnerschütterungen. Die Prinzipien unterscheiden sich für die Minderungsmaßnahmen im Gleis, im Boden und bei Gebäuden. Kraftübertragungsfunktionen isolierter und nicht isolierter Gleissysteme, reflektierte und durchgelassene Wellenamplituden bei gefüllten Bodenschlitzen und die Übertragung der Freifeldschwingungen ins Gebäude werden analysiert. Bei den einfachen Gleismodellen muss der richtige Anteil der unabgefederte Fahrzeugmasse zum eindimensionalen Gleismodell hinzugefügt werden. Der Minderungseffekt eines gefüllten Bodenschlitzes ist von der Steifigkeit und nicht von der Impedanz des Schichtmaterials bestimmt. Bei einer elastischen Gebäudelagerung muss die Minderungswirkung mit der richtigen Boden- (Fundament-) Steifigkeit berechnet werden, und das abgeminderte Gebäudeverhalten hängt wesentlich von der effektiven Gebäudemasse ab, die mit zunehmender Frequenz deutlich kleiner als die starre Gebäudemasse ist.
Methods have been presented for detailed studies of railway vibration and for the fast prediction of train-induced ground vibration. The ground vibration is generated by static or dynamic loads. The main purpose of this contribution was to show the influence of inhomogeneous soils on the different vibration components.
Layered soils, namely a soft layer on a stiffer half-space, yield a quite specific transmission behavior. The low-frequency and sometimes also high-frequency cut-off of the transfer function of the soil is demonstrated in theory and by experiments at many sites of which the soil model is approximated from dispersion and transfer function measurements. The layer frequency divides the frequency range in a low-frequency range, where the stiff half-space rules the low amplitudes, and a high amplitude high-frequency range which is mainly determined by the softer top layer. A thick soft layer yields a very low layer frequency, so that the higher soft soil amplitudes have a wider range down to low frequencies. A thin layer yields a high layer frequency, so that the high frequencies above this layer frequency are dominant. The higher the contrast between the stiff half-space and the soft layer is, the stronger the increase between the half-space and layer amplitudes, the more characteristic are the spectra of the soil transfer function. The range of measured soils has been from vS1 down to 125 m/s, vS2 up to 1000 m/s and the layer frequencies are within 10 Hz < f0 < 75 Hz. Moreover, during this measuring campaign in Switzerland, all 11 sites showed clearly the layer-on-half-space behaviour. The transfer functions of inhomogeneous soils have been used to predict the ground vibration due to dynamic axle loads which is usually thought to be the most important component.
The passage of static loads, in the contrary, results in very small vibration amplitudes for low train speeds, which can only be found at near distances and at low frequencies. They attenuate very rapidly with distance and lose very rapidly the higher frequency content. The passage of static axle loads can be included in the prediction of railway vibration just for completeness.
Special attention should be given to the case if the train runs with the Rayleigh-wave speed of the soil (Rayleigh train). The Rayleigh-train effect is strongest for a homogeneous half-space: At the near-field of the track the amplitudes are raised strongly compared to normal trains, and in addition, little attenuation with distance is observed. In case of a layered soil, the low-frequency cut-off reduces the frequency range and the amplitudes of the homogeneous quasi-static ground vibrations. Therefore, the Rayleigh-train effects are clearly reduced by a layered soil and they disappear if the layer frequency (for example for a thin layer) is higher than the frequency band of the axle impulse. The Rayleigh-train effect could completely disappear in a randomly inhomogeneous soil, but this has not been analysed so far.
The axle impulses from static loads can have an additional, quite different effect. They can be scattered by a randomly inhomogeneous soil so that a part (the scattered part) of the axle impulse can reach further distances from the track. This can establish a certain mid-frequency component of the ground vibration which becomes dominant in the far-field, and this important component exists for all train speeds. Experimental results from BAM and international measurements show the importance of the corresponding frequency range.
The mitigation of train induced ground vibration by elastic and stiff track elements has been analysed threefold. The vehicle-track interaction yields the reduction at high frequencies above the vehicle-track resonance. This is the standard effect. The filtering of trackbed errors by the bending stiffness of the track yields a certain mid-frequency effect. An even stronger mid-frequency effect is predicted for the mitigation of the scattered axle impulses by the bending stiffness and elastic elements of the track.
Mitigation measures of railway induced vibration have been demonstrated at the emission, transmission and immission part. It must be carefully observed that the correct masses and stiffnesses are used.
Typical mistakes have been shown,
- 1D models for vehicle-track interaction,
- impedance instead of stiffness for the infill material of a trench,
- rigid buildings or neglecting the soil-building interaction.
The dominant mid-frequency part of the ground vibration is due to the irregular soil.
Die Prognose und Minderung von Bahnerschütterungen haben eine lange Tradition in der Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und -prüfung. Im Jahr 2006 wurde eine Prognose-Software fertiggestellt, die viele Forschungs- und Messergebnisse zusammenfasst. Sie umfasst die Teilbereiche Emission (die Anregung durch die Fahrzeug-Fahrweg-Untergrund-Wechselwirkung), die Transmission (die Ausbreitung durch den Boden) und die Immission (die Übertragung vom Freifeld in ein Gebäude). Die Prognose geschieht in allen Teilen mit einfachen Formeln, die veröffentlicht sind und zur Anwendung für Jedermann zur Verfügung stehen. Es werden Beispiele zur Emission und zur Transmission gezeigt.
Im Bereich Transmissionsprognose werden zu den Anregungskräften (aus dem Emissionsteil) die Bodenerschütterungen als Schwinggeschwindigkeitsterzspektren berechnet. Das Ergebnis hängt stark von der Bodensteifigkeit, -dämpfung und -schichtung ab. Dies wurde später mit einer Messkampagne in der Schweiz an 10 Messorten bestätigt (Bild 1). Die Berechnung erfolgt näherungsweise für einen geschichteten Boden mit einer frequenzabhängigen Wellengeschwindigkeit (Dispersion) oder einem tiefenabhängigen Wellengeschwindigkeitsprofil.
Die Anregungskräfte werden im Prognosebereich Emission mit einem 2-dimensionalen Gleismodell berechnet (Bild 2). 1-dimensionale Modelle liefern meist falsche Ergebnisse und 3-dimensionale Modelle (zum Beispiel mit der kombinierten Finite-Element-Randelement-Methode) sind für eine Erschütterungs¬prognose sicherlich zu aufwändig. Das 2-dimensionale Modell wurde an 3-dimensionale Ergebnisse so angepasst, dass die Ergebnisse für viele Gleise und Böden annähernd zutreffen. Auch Minderungs¬maßnahmen am Gleis können mit diesem Modell sehr gut berechnet werden.
Die Prognoseverfahren wurden in den folgenden Jahren weiter verfeinert. Es wurde die quasi-statische Anregung durch die bewegten statischen Zuglasten mit einer Näherungsformel ergänzt, so dass auch das tieffrequente Nahfeld realistisch erfasst werden kann. Mit der Berücksichtigung der Achsfolge (insbesondere zwischen den Achsen im Drehgestell) ergeben sich zwei typische Minima in den Erschütterungsspektren, die oft auch in den Messungen beobachtet werden. Der Amplitudenanteil zwischen diesen beiden Minima ist oft stärker angehoben, so dass hier eine zusätzliche Erschütterungsanregung vermutet wird. Dieser Anteil kann rein empirisch prognostiziert werden, so wie das in den englischen Prognosen (zuletzt für das Highspeed2-Projekt) enthalten ist. Die Begründung dieses Anteils ist allerdings nicht die Achsfolge, sondern die Zerstreuung der statischen Achslastimpulse durch einen unregelmäßigen Gleisuntergrund und Boden.
Die messtechnische Ermittlung eines Minderungseffektes ist komplizierter als allgemein angenommen. Es reicht nicht aus, jeweils an einem Messpunkt in der Nähe eines Gleises mit und ohne Minderungs¬maßnahme die Erschütterungen zu messen und aus dem Verhältnis der Amplituden (beziehungsweise aus der Differenz der Pegel) „die Einfügedämmung“ zu ermitteln. Es wird an Beispielen gezeigt, wie man hier sinnvoller vorgehen kann.
1. Zunächst ist es wichtig, nicht nur die Einfügedämmung sondern auch die Originalspektren mit und ohne Minderung zu dokumentieren und zu veröffentlichen, damit man kontrollieren kann, ob wesentliche Amplituden und Frequenzbereiche reduziert sind oder ob es sich um eher zufällige Minderungen oder Verstärkungen handelt. (Beispiel Unterschottermatte/Raron, Müller/SBB)
2. Der Messpunkt sollte nicht im Nahbereich des Gleises liegen, da ansonsten eine zu günstige, falsche Einfügedämmung bestimmt wird. (Beispiel Tunnel/ Leipzig/Breitsamter)
3. Um Zufälligkeiten zu vermeiden, sollte man an mehr als einem Punkt messen. (Beispiel Unterschotterplatte/Altheim/Auersch)
4. Man sollte eigentlich immer auch die Bodenkennwerte (Steifigkeit, Dämpfung, Amplituden-abnahme, Übertagungsfunktion) messen. Selbst bei nahegelegene Messquerschnitten kann man Überraschungen erleben. (Beispiel erste ICE-Messungen/bei Würzburg/Auersch)
5. Bei verschiedenen Bodenkennwerten kann man eine Korrektur durchführen. (Beispiel Gleis-tröge/Mistler) Am besten bestimmt man ein äquivalentes Kraftspektrum zu jedem Messort und jedem Messzug (Beispiel Feste Fahrbahn/Gardelegen/Auersch)
6. Prinzipiell gibt es nicht die Einfügedämmung einer Maßnahme. Die Einfügedämmung ist immer boden- und referenzsystemabhängig. Die „beste“ Einfügungsdämmung erhält man mit einem steifen Untergrund (Beispiel Unterschottermatte/Tunnel/München Gasteig/Wettschureck) Das heißt aber nicht, dass die Maßnahme durch einen künstlich versteiften Untergrund besser wird (Beispiel Unterschottermatten/RRT2006/Auersch)
Es werden Messbeispiele gezeigt, die alle neben einer hochfrequenten dynamischen Minderung auch eine mittelfrequente quasi-statische Minderung aufweisen. Dabei wird der mittelfrequente Zerstreuanteil der statischen Achslastimpulse durch die breitere Lastverteilung und damit die Impulsdehnung der Achslastimpulse reduziert. Diese Impulsdehnung lässt sich mit dem 2-dimensionalen Gleismodell berechnen. Die Minderungswirkung hängt aber wiederum vom Referenzsystem und dessen unregel¬mäßiger Steifigkeitsverteilung ab. Je unregelmäßiger der Boden und Gleisuntergrund des Referenz¬systems, desto stärker ist die Minderungswirkung.
Die Prognose und Minderung von Bahnerschütterungen haben eine lange Tradition in der Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und -prüfung. Im Jahr 2006 wurde eine Prognose-Software fertiggestellt, die viele Forschungs- und Messergebnisse zusammenfasst. Sie umfasst die Teilbereiche Emission (die Anregung durch die Fahrzeug-Fahrweg-Untergrund-Wechselwirkung), die Transmission (die Ausbreitung durch den Boden) und die Immission (die Übertragung vom Freifeld in ein Gebäude). Die Prognose geschieht in allen Teilen mit einfachen Formeln, die veröffentlicht sind und zur Anwendung für Jedermann zur Verfügung stehen. Es werden Beispiele zur Emission und zur Transmission gezeigt. Im Bereich Transmissionsprognose werden zu den Anregungskräften (aus dem Emissionsteil) die Bodenerschütterungen als Schwinggeschwindigkeitsterzspektren berechnet. Das Ergebnis hängt stark von der Bodensteifigkeit, -dämpfung und -schichtung ab. Dies wurde später mit einer Messkampagne in der Schweiz an 10 Messorten bestätigt. Die Berechnung erfolgt näherungsweise für einen geschichteten Boden mit einer frequenzabhängigen Wellengeschwindigkeit (Dispersion) oder einem tiefenabhängigen Wellengeschwindigkeitsprofil. Die Anregungskräfte werden im Prognosebereich Emission mit einem 2-dimensionalen Gleismodell berechnet. 1-dimensionale Modelle liefern meist falsche Ergebnisse und 3-dimensionale Modelle (zum Beispiel mit der kombinierten Finite-Element-Randelement-Methode) sind für eine Erschütterungs¬prognose sicherlich zu aufwändig. Das 2-dimensionale Modell wurde an 3-dimensionale Ergebnisse so angepasst, dass die Ergebnisse für viele Gleise und Böden annähernd zutreffen. Auch Minderungs¬maßnahmen am Gleis können mit diesem Modell sehr gut berechnet werden. Die Prognoseverfahren wurden in den folgenden Jahren weiter verfeinert. Es wurde die quasi-statische Anregung durch die bewegten statischen Zuglasten mit einer Näherungsformel ergänzt, so dass auch das tieffrequente Nahfeld realistisch erfasst werden kann. Mit der Berücksichtigung der Achsfolge (insbesondere zwischen den Achsen im Drehgestell) ergeben sich zwei typische Minima in den Erschütterungsspektren, die oft auch in den Messungen beobachtet werden. Der Amplitudenanteil zwischen diesen beiden Minima ist oft stärker angehoben, so dass hier eine zusätzliche Erschütterungsanregung vermutet wird. Dieser Anteil kann rein empirisch prognostiziert werden, so wie das in den englischen Prognosen (zuletzt für das Highspeed2-Projekt) enthalten ist. Die Begründung dieses Anteils ist allerdings nicht die Achsfolge, sondern die Zerstreuung der statischen Achslastimpulse durch einen unregelmäßigen Gleisuntergrund und Boden. Die messtechnische Ermittlung eines Minderungseffektes ist komplizierter als allgemein angenommen. Es reicht nicht aus, jeweils an einem Messpunkt in der Nähe eines Gleises mit und ohne Minderungsmaßnahme die Erschütterungen zu messen und aus dem Verhältnis der Amplituden (beziehungsweise aus der Differenz der Pegel) „die Einfügedämmung“ zu ermitteln. Es wird an Beispielen gezeigt, wie man hier sinnvoller vorgehen kann. 1. Zunächst ist es wichtig, nicht nur die Einfügedämmung sondern auch die Originalspektren mit und ohne Minderung zu dokumentieren und zu veröffentlichen, damit man kontrollieren kann, ob wesentliche Amplituden und Frequenzbereiche reduziert sind oder ob es sich um eher zufällige Minderungen oder Verstärkungen handelt. (Beispiel Unterschottermatte/Raron, Müller/SBB) 2. Der Messpunkt sollte nicht im Nahbereich des Gleises liegen, da ansonsten eine zu günstige, falsche Einfügedämmung bestimmt wird. (Beispiel Tunnel/ Leipzig/Breitsamter) 3. Um Zufälligkeiten zu vermeiden, sollte man an mehr als einem Punkt messen. (Beispiel Unterschotterplatte/Altheim/Auersch) 4. Man sollte eigentlich immer auch die Bodenkennwerte (Steifigkeit, Dämpfung, Amplituden-abnahme, Übertagungsfunktion) messen. Selbst bei nahegelegene Messquerschnitten kann man Überraschungen erleben. (Beispiel erste ICE-Messungen/bei Würzburg/Auersch) 5. Bei verschiedenen Bodenkennwerten kann man eine Korrektur durchführen. (Beispiel Gleis-tröge/Mistler) Am besten bestimmt man ein äquivalentes Kraftspektrum zu jedem Messort und jedem Messzug (Beispiel Feste Fahrbahn/Gardelegen/Auersch) 6. Prinzipiell gibt es nicht die Einfügedämmung einer Maßnahme. Die Einfügedämmung ist immer boden- und referenzsystemabhängig. Die „beste“ Einfügungsdämmung erhält man mit einem steifen Untergrund (Beispiel Unterschottermatte/Tunnel/München Gasteig/Wettschureck) Das heißt aber nicht, dass die Maßnahme durch einen künstlich versteiften Untergrund besser wird (Beispiel Unterschottermatten/RRT2006/Auersch) Es werden Messbeispiele gezeigt, die alle neben einer hochfrequenten dynamischen Minderung auch eine mittelfrequente quasi-statische Minderung aufweisen. Dabei wird der mittelfrequente Zerstreuanteil der statischen Achslastimpulse durch die breitere Lastverteilung und damit die Impulsdehnung der Achslastimpulse reduziert. Diese Impulsdehnung lässt sich mit dem 2-dimensionalen Gleismodell berechnen. Die Minderungswirkung hängt aber wiederum vom Referenzsystem und dessen unregelmäßiger Steifigkeitsverteilung ab. Je unregelmäßiger der Boden und Gleisuntergrund des Referenzsystems, desto stärker ist die Minderungswirkung.
The Federal Institute of Material Research and Testing has performed many impact tests from very small laboratory tests to very big “free-field” tests with heavy containers on stiff foundations. The first measurements have been done on a big foundation where it should be guaranteed that the foundation is rigid and the container is tested properly. Later on, a smaller drop test facility has been built on the ground inside an existing building. It had to be controlled by prediction and measurements that the drop test will not damage the building. Tests from different heights on soft, medium, and stiff targets have been done to find out rules which allow to identify acceptable and unacceptable drop tests. Later on, the biggest drop test facility has been built for masses up to 200 t. It was necessary for the design of the foundation to estimate the forces which oc-cur during the drop tests. In addititon, the acceptable tests should be selected and controlled by measurements where the impact duration is important. Dif-ferent sensors, accelerometers, accelerometers with mechanical filters, geo-phones (velocity transducers), strain gauges, and pressure cells have been ap-plied for these tasks. Signal transformations and model calculations have been used to check and understand the dynamic measurements. The simplest law is the conservation of the momentum which is a good approximation if the impact is short. If the soil under the foundation has an influence on the deceleration of the container, the maximum foundation velocity is lower than the simple esti-mation.
The Federal Institute of Material Research and Testing has performed many impact tests from very small laboratory tests to very big “free-field” tests with heavy containers on stiff foundations. The first measurements have been done on a big foundation where it should be guaranteed that the foundation is rigid and the container is tested properly. Later on, a smaller drop test facility has been built on the ground inside an existing building. It had to be controlled by prediction and measurements that the drop test will not damage the building. Tests from different heights on soft, medium, and stiff targets have been done to find out rules which allow to identify acceptable and unacceptable drop tests. Later on, the biggest drop test facility has been built for masses up to 200 t. It was necessary for the design of the foundation to estimate the forces which oc-cur during the drop tests. In addititon, the acceptable tests should be selected and controlled by measurements where the impact duration is important. Dif-ferent sensors, accelerometers, accelerometers with mechanical filters, geo-phones (velocity transducers), strain gauges, and pressure cells have been ap-plied for these tasks. Signal transformations and model calculations have been used to check and understand the dynamic measurements. The simplest law is the conservation of the momentum which is a good approximation if the impact is short. If the soil under the foundation has an influence on the deceleration of the container, the maximum foundation velocity is lower than the simple esti-mation.
Vibration measurements have many causes and many technical and natural sources. Problems can sometimes be solved by short-term measurements, but in many cases, a long-term measurement is necessary. In long-term measurements of days, weeks, months and even years, it is easy to collect a huge quantity of raw data, but at the end, the post-processing of these data can be exhausting (for example one-year vibration data of a wind energy tower). A software has been developed which con-sists of measuring and evaluation routines where the measuring routines can operate different meas-uring systems and different measuring cards. The main advantage of this software is the fact that the interesting evaluations can be integrated in the measuring process so that the characteristics of the vibration can be extracted without storing all the raw data. Only important time segments are stored, for example train passages. The overall concept of the software and the main evaluation routines will be described in some details. Examples of our measurement experience will illustrate the capabilities of the software. 1) Surveying construction work in nearby sensitive buildings (for example an old wind tunnel), including a stable alarm system and meaningful vibration limits. 2) Prediction of train-induced vibration for a planned building to prevent annoyance and to improve the building design. 3) Modal analysis and long term measurements of several single- or multi-span, concrete or steel bridges 4) Modal and wave analysis of coupled floors in a historical building (“Neues Palais” at Potsdam). 5) Soil properties of various measurement sites (different routines to evaluate the dispersion). Moreover, from many projects, amplitudes, frequencies, and attenuation laws have been collected and analysed for the different sources such as vibratory or impact pile driving and ground compaction, demolition work with different machines, blasting in quarries and in tunnel works, bomb and mine clearing.
Vibration measurements have many causes and many technical and natural sources. Problems can sometimes be solved by short-term measurements, but in many cases, a long-term measurement is necessary. In long-term measurements of days, weeks, months and even years, it is easy to collect a huge quantity of raw data, but at the end, the post-processing of these data can be exhausting (for example one-year vibration data of a wind energy tower). A software has been developed which con-sists of measuring and evaluation routines where the measuring routines can operate different meas-uring systems and different measuring cards. The main advantage of this software is the fact that the interesting evaluations can be integrated in the measuring process so that the characteristics of the vibration can be extracted without storing all the raw data. Only important time segments are stored, for example train passages. The overall concept of the software and the main evaluation routines will be described in some details. Examples of our measurement experience will illustrate the capabilities of the software. 1) Surveying construction work in nearby sensitive buildings (for example an old wind tunnel), including a stable alarm system and meaningful vibration limits. 2) Prediction of train-induced vibration for a planned building to prevent annoyance and to improve the building design. 3) Modal analysis and long term measurements of several single- or multi-span, concrete or steel bridges 4) Modal and wave analysis of coupled floors in a historical building (“Neues Palais” at Potsdam). 5) Soil properties of various measurement sites (different routines to evaluate the dispersion). Moreover, from many projects, amplitudes, frequencies, and attenuation laws have been collected and analysed for the different sources such as vibratory or impact pile driving and ground compaction, demolition work with different machines, blasting in quarries and in tunnel works, bomb and mine clearing.
Measured train passages and hammer impacts in combination with track-soil calculation have been successfully used for the detection of damaged slab tracks. This approach is now extended to intact slab and ballast tracks. The vibrations of many tracks have been measured at several levels from rail, sleeper, track plate, base plate, base layer to the subsoil by velocity or acceleration sensors. The time histories have to be integrated once or twice to get the displacements. The displacement signals include an arbitrary time-dependent shift which must be eliminated or respected in the interpretation. On the other hand, the calculation of slab and ballast tracks have been done in frequency-wavenumber domain. The displacements along the track and the frequency-dependent compliance transfer functions can be calculated. The latter can be compared with the results of the hammer impacts on the track. The deformation of the track can be transformed to time histories for a whole train and compared to the measured train passages. Many slab (and ballast) tracks have been measured at different sites. The displacements of the tracks are presented, and the following parameters have been analysed in the measurement results: slab track vs. ballast track, different types of slab tracks, damaged slab tracks, different trains, switches at different measuring points, an elastic layer, the mortar layer, different soils at different places. The soil should have the dominant influence on the track-plate displacements. Slab and ballast track yield also big differences in maximum displacement and width of deformation. Some of the preceding aspects will be analysed in comparison of measurement and theory.
Measured train passages and hammer impacts in combination with track-soil calculation have been successfully used for the detection of damaged slab tracks. This approach is now extended to intact slab and ballast tracks. The vibrations of many tracks have been measured at several levels from rail, sleeper, track plate, base plate, base layer to the subsoil by velocity or acceleration sensors. The time histories have to be integrated once or twice to get the displacements. The displacement signals include an arbitrary time-dependent shift which must be eliminated or respected in the interpretation. On the other hand, the calculation of slab and ballast tracks have been done in frequency-wavenumber domain. The displacements along the track and the frequency-dependent compliance transfer functions can be calculated. The latter can be compared with the results of the hammer impacts on the track. The deformation of the track can be transformed to time histories for a whole train and compared to the measured train passages. Many slab (and ballast) tracks have been measured at different sites. The displacements of the tracks are presented, and the following parameters have been analysed in the measurement results: slab track vs. ballast track, different types of slab tracks, damaged slab tracks, different trains, switches at different measuring points, an elastic layer, the mortar layer, different soils at different places. The soil should have the dominant influence on the track-plate displacements. Slab and ballast track yield also big differences in maximum displacement and width of deformation. Some of the preceding aspects will be analysed in comparison of measurement and theory.
In the last three decades, the vibrations of many floors and bridges have been measured. The contribution shows some evaluation methods, experimental results and some modelling and theoretical results. Simple evaluation methods have been developed for single and coupled floors. Two coupled beams have been measured in good agreement with the theory. A more complex coupling model has been found for a large wooden floor in a castle consisting of six floor bays which correlates well with the measurements. Damaged and intact poles have been tested by their natural frequencies and damping values, and a fair correlation between the degree of damage and the shift of the frequency. Road bridges have been analysed in detail and some examples are presented. Railway bridges and trains are studied for resonant excitation. The risk of resonance can be estimated in frequency domain by using axle-sequence spectra of the train and the natural frequencies of the bridge. A measurement example shows the amplification, but even stronger the cancellation of the subsequent axle responses. Several high-speed trains and freight trains have been analysed for their potential resonance amplification.
In the last three decades, the vibrations of many floors and bridges have been measured. The contribution shows some evaluation methods, experimental results and some modelling and theoretical results. Simple evaluation methods have been developed for single and coupled floors. Two coupled beams have been measured in good agreement with the theory. A more complex coupling model has been found for a large wooden floor in a castle consisting of six floor bays which correlates well with the measurements. Damaged and intact poles have been tested by their natural frequencies and damping values, and a fair correlation between the degree of damage and the shift of the frequency. Road bridges have been analysed in detail and some examples are presented. Railway bridges and trains are studied for resonant excitation. The risk of resonance can be estimated in frequency domain by using axle-sequence spectra of the train and the natural frequencies of the bridge. A measurement example shows the amplification, but even stronger the cancellation of the subsequent axle responses. Several high-speed trains and freight trains have been analysed for their potential resonance amplification.
The present contribution evaluates four measuring series made by the Federal Institute of Material Research and Testing for the relations between train speed and ground vibration amplitudes. This experimental evaluation is supported by the simulation of the train passages at the different sites by using appropriate excitation mechanisms and forces as well as layered soil models which have been derived from impact measurements at each site.
The present contribution evaluates four measuring series made by the Federal Institute of Material Research and Testing for the relations between train speed and ground vibration amplitudes. This experimental evaluation is supported by the simulation of the train passages at the different sites by using appropriate excitation mechanisms and forces as well as layered soil models which have been derived from impact measurements at each site.
The present contribution evaluates four measuring series made by the Federal Institute of Material Research and Testing for the relations between train speed and ground vibration amplitudes. This experimental evaluation is supported by the simulation of the train passages at the different sites by using appropriate excitation mechanisms and forces as well as layered soil models which have been derived from impact measurements at each site.
Prediction of building noise and vibration – 3D finite element and 1D wave propagation models
(2021)
Construction work or traffic excite nearby buildings, and the perceptible or audible vibration can be a nuisance for the inhabitants. The transfer of the vibration from the free field to the building has been calculated by the finite element method for many models in consultancy and research work. The analysis for all storeys of certain building points such as walls, columns and floors unveiled some rules, some typical modes, and some wavetype responses. A simplified building-soil model has been created, which includes well these effects of building-soil resonance, wall/column resonance, floor resonances, and the high-frequency reduction. The model consists of one wall for a wall-type apartment building or a column for each specific part (mid, side or corner) of a column-type office building. The building response in the high-frequency (acoustic) region is calculated as mean values over all storeys and over wider frequency bands, by wave-type asymptotes of an infinitely tall building, and by the soil to wall ratio of impedances. The secondary noise is predicted by Transfer values between the building vibration (center of floors, walls at a room corner) and the sound pressure.