Research Papers

A Finite Element Methodology to Study Soil–Structure Interaction in High-Speed Railway Bridges

[+] Author and Article Information
Antonio Martínez-De la Concha

Structures Group,
School of Engineering,
University of Seville,
Camino de los Descubrimientos, s/n,
Seville 41092, Spain

Héctor Cifuentes, Fernando Medina

Structures Group,
School of Engineering,
University of Seville,
Camino de los Descubrimientos, s/n,
Seville 41092, Spain

Contributed by the Design Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL AND NONLINEAR DYNAMICS. Manuscript received June 28, 2017; final manuscript received December 12, 2017; published online January 25, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Corina Sandu.

J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam 13(3), 031010 (Jan 25, 2018) (14 pages) Paper No: CND-17-1283; doi: 10.1115/1.4038819 History: Received June 28, 2017; Revised December 12, 2017

This paper analyzes the dynamic soil–structure interaction (SSI) of a railway bridge under the load transmitted by high-speed trains using the finite element method (FEM). In this type of bridges, the correct analysis of SSI requires proper modeling of the soil; however, this task is one of the most difficult to achieve with the FEM method. In this study, we explored the influence of SSI on the dynamic properties of the structure and the structure's response to high-speed train traffic using commercial finite element software with direct integration and modal superposition methods. High-speed trains are characterized by the high-speed load model (HSLM) in the Eurocode. We performed sensitivity analyses of the influence of several parameters on the model, such as the size and stiffness of the discretized soil, mesh size, and the influence of the dynamic behavior of the excitation. Based on the results, we make some important and reliable recommendations for building an efficient and simple model that includes SSI. We conducted a dynamic analysis of a full model of a general multispan bridge including the piers, abutments, and soil and identified the impact factors that affected the design of the bridge. The analysis revealed that the methodology we propose allows for a more accurate determination of the dynamic effects of the passage of a train over the bridge, compared to the simpler and more widely used analysis of a directly supported isolated deck, which tends to overestimate the impact factors.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Alarcón, E. , 1971, “ El Coeficiente De Impacto En Puentes De Ferrocarril,” Rev. Obras Públicas, 118, pp. 689–704.
Alarcón Álvarez, E. , Álvarez Cabal, R. , Doblaré Castellano, M. , and Molina Ruiz, F. J. , 1985, “Efectos Dinámicos En Puentes De Ferrocarril,” Hormigón Acero, 155, pp. 173–186.
Domínguez, J. , 2001, “Dinámica de Puentes de Ferrocarril para Alta Velocidad: Métodos de Cálculo y Estudio de la Resonancia,” Ph.D. thesis, E.T.S.I. Caminos, Canales y Puertos, Madrid, Spain.
Goicolea, J. M. , Gabaldón, F. , and Riquelme, F. , 2005, “ Design Issues for Dynamics of High Speed Railway Bridges,” Dynamics of High-Speed Railway Bridges, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
CEN, 2003, “Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures—Part 2: Traffic Loads on Bridges,” European Commitee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, Standard No. EN 1991-2 https://archive.org/details/en.1991.2.2003.
Ministerio de Fomento, 2010, “Instrucción de acciones a considerar en puentes de ferrocarril (IAPF),” Dirección General de Ferrocarriles, Centro de Publicaciones, Ministerio de Fomento, Madrid, Spain.
Johansson, C. , Nualláin, N. Á. N. , Pacoste, C. , and Andersson, A. , 2014, “ A Methodology for the Preliminary Assessment of Existing Railway Bridges for High-Speed Traffic,” Eng. Struct., 58, pp. 25–35. [CrossRef]
Majka, M. , and Hartnett, M. , 2008, “ Effects of Speed, Load and Damping on the Dynamic Response of Railway Bridges and Vehicles,” Comput. Struct., 86, pp. 556–572. [CrossRef]
Ülker-Kaustell, M. , Karoumi, R. , and Pacoste, C. , 2010, “ Simplified Analysis of the Dynamic Soil-Structure Interaction of a Portal Frame Railway Bridge,” Eng. Struct., 32, pp. 3692–3698. [CrossRef]
Sextos, A. G. , Pitilakis, K. D. , and Kappos, A. J. , 2003, “ Inelastic Dynamic Analysis of RC Bridges Accounting for Spatial Variability of Ground Motion, Site Effects and Soil-Structure Interaction Phenomena—Part 1: Methodology and Analytical Tools,” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 32, pp. 607–627. [CrossRef]
Xingwen, H. , 2007, “Analytical Approaches to Dynamic Issues Related to High-Speed Railway Bridge-Train Interaction System,” Ph.D. thesis, Kobe University, Kobe, Japan. http://www.lib.kobe-u.ac.jp/repository/thesis/d1/D1003956.pdf
Johansson, C. , 2013, “Simplified Dynamic Analysis of Railway Bridges Under High-Speed Trains,” KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
Romero, A. , Solís, M. , Domínguez, J. , and Galvín, P. , 2013, “ Soil-Structure Interaction in Resonant Railway Bridges,” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng., 47, pp. 108–116. [CrossRef]
Antolín, P. , Goicolea, J. M. , Oliva, J. , and Astiz, M. A. , 2012, “ Nonlinear Train-Bridge Lateral Interaction Using a Simplified Wheel-Rail Contact Method Within a Finite Element Framework,” ASME J. Comput. Nonlinear Dyn., 7(4), p. 041014. [CrossRef]
Zhao, X. , Li, Z. , and Dollevoet, R. , 2014, “ Influence of the Fastening Modeling on the Vehicle-Track Interaction at Singular Rail Surface Defects,” J. Comput. Nonlinear Dyn., 9(3), p. 031002. [CrossRef]
Ülker-Kaustell, M. , and Karoumi, R. , 2012, “ Influence of Non-Linear Stiffness and Damping on the Train-Bridge Resonance of a Simply Supported Railway Bridge,” Eng. Struct., 41, pp. 350–355. [CrossRef]
Johansson, C. , Pacoste, C. , and Karoumi, R. , 2013, “ Closed-Form Solution for the Mode Superposition Analysis of the Vibration in Multi-Span Beam Bridges Caused by Concentrated Moving Loads,” Comput. Struct., 119, pp. 85–94. [CrossRef]
Mellat, P. , Andersson, A. , Pettersson, L. , and Karoumi, R. , 2014, “ Dynamic Behaviour of a Short Span Soil-Steel Composite Bridge for High-Speed Railways—Field Measurements and FE-Analysis,” Eng. Struct., 69, pp. 49–61. [CrossRef]
Ucci, M. , Camata, G. , Spacone, E. , Lilliu, G. , Manie, J. , and Schreppers, G. J. , 2011, “ Nonlinear Soil-Structure Interaction of a Curved Bridge on the Italian Tollway A25,” Eighth International Conference on Structural Dynamics (EURODYN), Leuven, Belgium, July 4–6, pp. 621–628. https://dianafea.com/node/1299
Zhang, Y. , Conte, J. P. , Yang, Z. , Elgamal, A. , Bielak, J. , and Acero, G. , 2008, “ Two-Dimensional Nonlinear Earthquake Response Analysis of a Bridge-Foundation-Ground System,” Earthquake Spectra, 24, pp. 343–386. [CrossRef]
Domínguez, J. , and Roesset, J. , 1978, “Dynamic Stiffness of Rectangular Foundations,” Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, Report No. NASA STI/Recon Technical Report. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978STIN...7916152D
García, R. A. , 1984, “Estudio de problemas dinámicos en interacción suelo-estructura por el método de los elementos de contorno,” Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Gomes Correia, A. , Cunha, J. , Marcelino, J. , Caldeira, L. , Varandas, J. , Dimitrovová, Z. , Antão, A. , and Gonçalves Da Silva, M. , 2007, “ Dynamic Analysis of Rail Track for High Speed Trains. 2D Approach,” Fifth International Workshop on Application of Computational Mechanics on Geotechnical Engineering, Guimaraes, Portugal, Apr. 1–4, pp. 461–472. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Manuel_Silva8/publication/234169598_Dynamic_analysis_of_rail_track_for_high_speed_trains_2D_approach/links/55fc2d6408aec948c4b14ca1/Dynamic-analysis-of-rail-track-for-high-speed-trains-2D-approach.pdf
Hwang, H. , Liu, J. B. , and Chiu, Y.-H. , 2001, “Seismic Fragility Analysis of Highway Bridges,” Mid-America Earthquake Center, The University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, Technical Report. http://mae.cee.illinois.edu/publications/reports/Report01-06.pdf
Kim, S.-H. , and Shinozuka, M. , 2004, “ Development of Fragility Curves of Bridges Retrofitted by Column Jacketing,” Probab. Eng. Mech., 19, pp. 105–112. [CrossRef]
Lin, J.-W. , Chen, C.-W. , and Chung, S.-H. , 2012, “ Modeling and Assessment of Bridge Structure for Seismic Hazard Prevention,” Nat. Hazards, 61(3), pp. 1115–1126. [CrossRef]
Bathe, K. J. , 1996, Finite Element Procedures, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Zienkiewicz, O. C. , and Taylor, R. L. , 2000, The Finite Element Method, 5th ed., Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK. [PubMed] [PubMed]
Bolton Seed, H. , and Lysmer, J. , 1978, “ Soil-Structure Interaction Analyses by Finite Elements—State of the Art,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 46, pp. 349–365. [CrossRef]
Yang, Y. B. , and Hung, H. H. , 2009, Wave Propagation for Train-Induced Vibrations, World Scientific, Singapore. [CrossRef]
CEN, 2005, “ Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance---Part 2: Bridges,” European Commitee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, Standard No. EN 1998-2. https://archive.org/details/en.1998.2.2005
Cañizo, L. , Escario, B. , Faraco, C. , Fort, L. , Jiménez Salas, J. A. , Justo Alpañés, J. L. , Llorens, M. , Lorente de No, C. , Marsal, R. , Molina, R. , Muzas, F. , Oteo, C. , Rodríguez Ortiz, J. M. , Romana, M. , Serrano, A. , Soriano, A. , Uriel, A. , and Uriel, S. , 1970, “Geotecnia y cimientos,” Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos, Servicio de Publicaciones de Alumnos, Madrid, Spain.
Ministerio de Fomento, 2008, “Norma de Construcción Sismorresistente: Puentes (NCSP-07),” Ministerio de Fomento, Centro de Publicaciones, Madrid, Spain.
Lysmer, R. L. , and Kuhlemeyer, J. , 1969, “ Finite Dynamic Model for Infinite Media,” J. Eng. Mech. Div. ASCE, 95, pp. 859–878. http://cedb.asce.org/CEDBsearch/record.jsp?dockey=0016353
Sextos, A. G. , Kappos, A. J. , and Pitilakis, K. D. , 2003, “ Inelastic Dynamic Analysis of RC Bridges Accounting for Spatial Variability of Ground Motion, Site Effects and Soil-Structure Interaction Phenomena. Part 2: Parametric Study,” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 32, pp. 629–652. [CrossRef]
ERRI, 2002, “Utilisation de convois universels pour le dimensionnement dynamique de ponts-rails. Synthèse des résultats du D214.2 (Rapport final),” European Rail Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, ERRI Report No. D214.2.
Clough, R. W. , and Penzien, J. , 1975, Dynamics of Structures, McGraw-Hill, New York.
CEN, 2004, “ Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance—Part 1: General Rules, Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings,” European Commitee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, Standard No. EN 1998-1. https://archive.org/details/en.1998.1.2004
ASCE/SEI, 2010, “Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures,” American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VI, ASCE Standard No. 608. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/book/10.1061/9780784412916


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Geometry of the models of the isolated footing (a) and two adjacent isolated footings (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Geometric description of the bridge

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic model of the cross section of the deck

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Mesh discretization of the deck

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Full model discretization

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Maximum vertical displacements in the center of the footing for different sizes of discretized soil

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Displacement in the center of the footing as a function of time for discretized soil sizes of 1.4 × 1.4 × 1.4 m (a) and 5.0 × 5.0 × 5.0 m (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Maximum vertical displacements in the center of the footing for different discretized soil dimensions and methods of calculation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Maximum vertical displacements in the center of the footing for different numbers of modes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Maximum vertical displacement in the center of the footing for different mesh sizes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Maximum vertical displacements in the center of the footing for different pulse durations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Vertical displacements in the center of the footing for different mass ratios

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Response of the passive footing: (a) 2.5 times footing, (b) 5 times footing, (c) 7.5 times footing, and (d) 10 times footing

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Maximum vertical displacements in the isolated deck model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Maximum displacements in the reference node for 200 (a) and 300 (b) modes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Maximum displacements for soil Cs of 100 m/s (a), 300 m/s (b), 575 m/s (c), and 800 m/s (d)




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In