Accepted Manuscript

The geometrically nonlinear dynamic responses of simply supported

beams under moving loads

G.G. Sheng , X. Wang

PII: S0307-904X(17)30259-7
DOI: 10.1016/j.apm.2017.03.064
Reference: APM 11705

To appear in: Applied Mathematical Modelling

Received date: 10 October 2016

Revised date: 17 January 2017
Accepted date: 28 March 2017

Please cite this article as: G.G. Sheng , X. Wang , The geometrically nonlinear dynamic responses
of simply supported beams under moving loads, Applied Mathematical Modelling (2017), doi:
10.1016/j.apm.2017.03.064

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service
to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and
all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlights

 The load-structure interaction model with consideration of the nonlinear effect

T
is created.

IP
 The effects of key parameters on the nonlinear vibration are investigated.
 A series of comparison are performed and the investigations demonstrate

CR
good reliability
 The dynamic design of beams will be improved by the nonlinear analysis
and results.
US
AN
M
ED
PT
CE
AC

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

The geometrically nonlinear dynamic responses of simply

supported beams under moving loads
a,* b
G.G. Sheng , X.Wang
a
School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Changsha University of Science and

T
Technology, Changsha, Hunan 410114, People’s Republic of China

IP
b
School of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Civil Engineering (State Key Laboratory of Ocean

Engineering), Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200240, People’s Republic of China

CR
Abstract

US
This paper presents a method for determining the nonlinear dynamic responses of
structures under moving loads. The load is considered as a four degrees-of-freedom
AN
system with linear suspensions and tires flexibility, and the structure is modeled as a
Euler–Bernoulli beam with simply supported at both ends. The nonlinear dynamic
M

interaction of the load-structure system is discussed, and Kelvin-Voigt material model

is employed for the beam. The nonlinear partial differential equations of the dynamic
ED

interaction are derived by using the von Kármán nonlinear theory and D'Alembert's
principle. Based on the Galerkin method, the partial differential equations of the
PT

system are transformed into nonlinear ordinary equations, which can be solved by
using the Newmark method and Newton-Raphson iteration method. To validate the
CE

approach proposed in this paper, the comparison are performed using a moving mass
and a moving oscillator as the excitation sources, and the investigations demonstrate
AC

good reliability.
Keywords：Nonlinear vibration; beam; moving load

1. Introduction

Dynamic analysis of beams under moving loads has been an important topic in
structural engineering. The dynamic responses (inclinding dynamic stresses) could

*
Corresponding author. E-mail: jeffery710@163.com

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

become very larger than those of the static loads. The theoretical principles of
dynamic interaction are well known [1]. Numerous works on vibration of beams
under moving loads are reported in the literature [2, 3].
Linear free and forced vibrations of beams under moving loads have been studied
extensively. Using Euler-Bernoulli beam hypothesis, Law and Zhu [4] developed the
dynamic responses of a continuous beam under a moving vehicle by considering the
interaction between the beam and the vehicle. The vehicle is modeled as a four

T
freedom degrees mass-spring system. Based on the Biot's consolidation theory and

IP
Timoshenko beam model, Keivan et al.[5] analysed the dynamic response of

CR
poroelastic beams acted upon by a moving point load accounting for shear
deformation. Using the modal superposition, Yang and Lin [6] studied the dynamic

US
interaction between the vehicle and the beam, and the responses of the beam and the
vehicle are obtained. Museros et al.[7] studied the vibrations of simply supported
AN
beams under a constant moving loads, and a new approximate approach for estimating
the maximum acceleration was proposed. Using the mode superposition, Sudheesh
M

Kumar et al.[8] proposed a simple and compact formula to determine the free
vibration responses of a uniform beam under a single moving load. Using Laplace
ED

transformation, Johansson et al. [9] obtained a closed-form solution for the vibration
of Bernoulli-Euler beams subjected to a constant moving loads. Based on Timoshenko
PT

beam theory, Ding et al. [10] investigated the dynamic responses of a Timoshenko
beam under a moving harmonic load. Zhu et al. [11] established a linear
CE

complementarity method for a vehicle-bridge dynamic system considering separation

and random roughness. The dynamic interaction between the vehicle and the bridge is
AC

transformed into a standard linear complementarity problem. Using Euler-Bernoulli

beam hypothesis, Dimitrovová [12] obtained a new formula for the critical velocity of
a uniformly moving load. It is assumed that the load is traversing a beam supported by
a foundation of a finite depth. Simplified plane models of the foundation are presented
for the finite and infinite beams, respectively.
When beams are subjected to large magnitude loads or the frequency of loads is
close to the natural frequency of the beam, the beam may vibrate at large amplitude.
3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

In this case, linear theory is not suitable to analyze the large amplitude vibration of
beams. To design a stable and reliable beam, we should analyze the nonlinear
vibration characteristics of beams. Based on the Euler-Bernoulli beam theory and the
von Kármán nonlinear strain-displacement relationship, He et al. [13] developed the
nonlinear vibration of carbon nanotubes (CNTs)/fiber/polymer laminated multiscale
composite beam, Şimşek [14] investigated the nonlinear vibration of microbeams with
the nonlinear elastic foundation, and Zhu and Chung [15] studied the nonlinear

T
dynamical behaviors of a deploying beam with a spinning motion. Based on the

IP
Euler-Bernoulli beam model and Hamilton’s principle, Peng et al. [16] analysed the

CR
size-dependent micro-beams with nonlinear elasticity under electrical actuation.
Based on the Timoshenko beam theory, Ritz method and von Kármán type nonlinear

US
strain-displacement relationships, Chen et al. [17] analysed the nonlinear vibration of
shear deformable sandwich beam with a functionally graded porous core. Using the
AN
von-Kármán nonlinear strain-displacement relations, Faraji Oskouie and Ansari [18]
explored the nonlinear vibrations of fractional viscoelastic Timoshenko nanobeams
M

based on the Gurtin–Murdoch surface stress theory and the Galerkin approach. Based
on the Rayleigh beam theory with von Kármán type nonlinear strain-displacement
ED

relationships, Domagalski and Jędrysiak [19] analysed the nonlinear vibrations of

beams with periodic structure.
PT

Although beams under moving loads have been widely investigated, only limited
literature can be found about the nonlinear vibration of beams subjected to moving
CE

loads in the research works. An experimental study [20] was carried out on a
T-section reinforced concrete beam subject to the action of a moving model vehicle,
AC

and nonlinearities were detected by examining the changes in the instantaneous

frequency when the vehicular loads are at different locations along the beam. Based
on the von Kármán nonlinear theory, Şimşek and Kocatürk [21] investigated the
nonlinear vibration of a damping beam under a moving load. Using the separation of
variables approach and Euler-Bernoulli beam hypothesis, Mamandi et al. [22]
investigated the nonlinear problem of an inclined beam under a moving force. Based
on Euler-Bernoulli beam hypothesis and von Kármán geometric nonlinear theory, Tao
4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

et al. [23] studied the nonlinear dynamic behaviors of fiber metal laminated beams
under moving loads in thermal environments. Using the large deformation assumption
in beam theory, Karimi and Ziaei-Rad [24] explored the nonlinear coupled vibration
of a beam with moving supports under the action of a moving mass, and two different
cases (constant and variable speed) were studied.
From the above-mentioned literatures of the nonlinear problem, it is found that
most of moving loads are constant (moving mass, moving force model). The objective

T
of this paper is to analyze the nonlinear dynamic interaction problem of the

IP
load-structure system. The displacement field of the beam is expressed in terms of the

CR
linear fundamental vibration modes. Galerkin’s method is utilized to convert the
governing partial differential equations to nonlinear ordinary differential equations.

US
The effects of prestress load, internal damping, surface roughness, span of the beam
and moving speed of the load on the nonlinear vibration responses are investigated.
AN
2. Theoretical formulations

2.1. Loading model

M

A load is considered as a vehicle (four freedom degrees system moving at a

constant speed V , see Fig. 1). m1 , m2 and m3 is the mass of the vehicle body
ED

and the vehicle axles, respectively. I1 is the inertia moment of the vehicle body.
PT

( k1 , k3 ) and ( k 2 , k 4 ) are the stiffnesses from the suspensions and the tyres,

respectively. ( c1 , c3 ) and ( c2 , c4 ) are the damping from the suspensions and the tyres,
CE

respectively. u1 and  are the vertical displacement and pitch angle of the vehicle
AC

body, respectively. u2 and u3 are the vertical displacements of the vehicle axles.

The structure is modeled as a Euler-Benoulli beam with rectanglar cross section and
simply supported ends, length L , and subjected to axial prestress load P .
Using the D'Alembert's principle, the equations of motion of loading model are
derived as follows:

m1u1  k1 z2  c1 z2  k3 z3  c3 z3  m1 g  0 (1)

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

I1  k3e2 z3  c3e2 z3  k1e1 z2  c1e1 z2  0 (2)

m2u2  k3 z2  c1 z2  f1  m2 g  0 (3)

m3u3  k1 z3  c3 z3  f 2  m3 g  0 (4)

where the superposed dot denotes differentiation with respect to time,

z 2  u 2  (u1  e1 ) , z3  u3  (u1  e2 ) , g gravitational acceleration, f1 and f 2

T
are the load-structure interaction forces, and

IP
f1  k4 (w1  r1  u2 )  c2 (w1  r1  u2 ) (5)

CR
f 2  k2 (w2  r2  u3 )  c4 (w2  r2  u3 ) (6)

w1 and w2 are the vertical dynamic deflections of the beam at the contact points of

US
the rear wheel and the front wheel, respectively. r1 and r2 are the surface roughness
AN
of the beam at the contact points of the rear tyre and the front tyre, respectively.

2.2. Beam model

M

Let us consider a differential element of the beam shown in Fig.2. f ( x, t ) is

ED

transverse load along the length of the beam (interaction force at wheel). FN is the

axial force, M the bending moment, which are known as the stress resultants, and
PT

they are defined in terms of the normal stress  x on a cross section as

FN    x dA (7)
CE

M    x zdA (8)
A
AC

When rotary inertia and shear deformation are omitted, the shear force is
M
Fs  (9)
x
Considering the pure bending case, the von Kármán type nonlinear
strain-displacement relation is given as

1 w 2 2w
x  ( ) z 2 (10)
2 x x

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

where w is the transverse displacement of the beam. The material of the beam can

be expressed in terms of the Kelvin-Voigt model, so the normal stress  x is given as

 x
 x  E ( x   ) (11)
t

where E is Young’s modulus,  the internal damping constant of the beam.

Using Eqs. (7)–(11), the stress resultants( M , Fs , FN ) can be written as

T
2w 3w

IP
M   EI  EI (12)
x 2 x 2 t

CR
3w 4w
Fs   EI 3  EI 3 (13)
x x t

1 w
2 x
US
w  2 w
F N  EA  ( ) 2  EA( 
x xt
)P (14)
AN
where A , I are the area and inertia moment of the beam cross section, respectively.
Using D'Alembert's principle, we derive the equilibrium equation of the beam.
M

Summing the forces on an element of the beam ( in the z – direction, see Fig. 2)
gives the following equilibrium equation:
ED

 2 w Fs ( FN )
A    f ( x, t )  0 (15)
t 2 x x
PT

where  is the mass of the beam per unit volume, and

w
 (16)
CE

x
f ( x, t )   f1 ( x  x1 ) H1 (t )  f 2 ( x  x2 ) H 2 (t ) (17)
AC

    L 
where x1  Vt   , x2  Vt , H1 (t )  H  t   1  H  t    ,   e1  e2 (wheelbase),
 V1  V 

  L 
H 2 (t )  H (t ) 1  H  t    ,  (.) denotes Dirac delta function, H (t ) denotes
  V 

Heaviside unit step function.

Substituting Eqs. (13) ,(14), (16) and (17) into Eq. (15), the nonlinear equation of
motion can be written as
7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

2w 4w 5 w 2w

A  EI   EI  P
t 2 x 4 x 4t x 2

3 w 2  2 w w  2 w  2 w w 2  3 w
 EA( )  2  2 EA(  2  )   EA[( )  2 ]  f ( x, t ) (18)
2 x x x x xt x x t

where f ( x, t )   f1 ( x  x1 ) H1 (t )  f 2 ( x  x2 ) H 2 (t ) . Using Eqs. (1) - (4), f1 and f 2

can be rewritten as

T
m1 ge2 m1u1e2 I1
f1  m2 g   m2u2   (19)
  

IP
I1

CR
m1 ge1 m1u1e1
f 2  m3 g   m3u3   (20)
  

US
2.3. Discretization equations of the load-structure interaction
Using the separation of variables approach, the nonlinear responses of the beam
AN
are given by the expression [22, 25]:
n
w( x, t )    i ( x)qi (t ) (21)
i 1
M

where qi (t ) are time-dependent generalized coordinates to be determined,  i (x)

ED

are the linear fundamental vibration modes, and n is the number of vibration modes.
For the present case, the normal modal functions are
PT

2 i
 i ( x)  sin x , i  1,2,3n (22)
AL L
CE

The vertical displacements, w1 and w2 [see Eqs (5) and (6)], at the contact points

of the wheels and the beam are not independent coordinates, which can be given
AC

below
w( x, t ) w( x, t )
w1  w( x, t ) x x , w1  V  , (23)
1 x x  x t x  x
1 1

w( x, t ) w( x, t )
w2  w( x, t ) x x , w2  V  (24)
2 x x  x t x  x
2 2

Substituting Eqs.(19)–(22) into Eq. (18) , Eqs. (5),(6),(23),(24) into Eqs. (1)–(4),

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

and using Galerkin procedure, the coupled nonlinear ordinary differential equations

are obtained in terms of generalized coordinates qi (t ) ( i  1,2,3n ), u1 ,  , u2

and u3 :

qi (t )  2ii qi (t )  i2 qi (t )

 [e2i ( x1 ) H1 (t )   e1i ( x2 ) H 2 (t )  ] m1u1  i ( x1 ) H1 (t )m2u2

T
i ( x2 ) H 2 (t )m3u3  [i ( x1 ) H1 (t )   i ( x2 ) H 2 (t )  ]I1

IP
n n n n n n
  k ijkl
nol
q j (t )q k (t )ql (t )   cijkl
nol
q j (t )q k (t )q l (t )

CR
j 1 k 1 l 1 j 1 k 1 l 1

2 i
 (m2 g  m1 ge2  ) H1 (t ) sin (Vt   )
 AL

(m3 g  m1 ge1  ) H 2 (t )
US 2
 AL
L

i
sin Vt
AN
L

i  1,2,3n (25)
M

m1u1  (c1  c3 )u1  (c1e1  c3e2 )  c1u2  c3u3

(k1  k3 )u1  (k1e1  k3e2 )  k1u2  k3u3  m1g (26)

ED

I1  (c1e1  c3e2 )u1  (c1e12  c3e22 )  c1e1u2  c3e2u3

PT

(k1e1  k3e2 )u1  (k1e12  k3e22 )  k1e1u2  k3e2u3  0 (27)

n
CE

m2u2  c2  i ( x1 )qi (t )  c1u1  c1e1  (c1  c2 )u2  k1u1  k1e1

i 1

n 
AC

   k2i ( x1 )  c2V i( x1 )qi (t )   (k1  k2 )u2  m2 g  k2 r1  c2r1 (28)

 i 1 
n
m3u3  c4  i ( x2 )qi (t )  c3u1  c3e2  (c3  c4 )u3  k3u1  k3e2
i 1

n 
   k4i ( x2 )  c4V i( x2 )qi (t )   (k3  k4 )u3  m3 g  k4 r2  c4r2 (29)
 i 1 

where

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

 i  EI  P L    i  EI
2 2 4

i    1    , i    ,
L A  EI  i   2i  L  A

and the nonlinear term coefficients are given by

3E L
2  0
nol
k ijkl   i ( x) j ( x) k ( x) l( x)dx

2 E L E L
  i ( x) j ( x)k( x)l( x)dx 
 0 i
 ( x) j ( x)k ( x)l( x)dx
nol
cijkl
 0

T
Making the appropriate substitutions and performing the integrations, the coupled

IP
nonlinear equations of motion can be written as

CR
MX + (CL + CNol )X + (K L + K Nol )X = F (30)

L
where M , C and K L are the linear time-dependent mass, damping and stiffness
US
matrices (i. e., time varying model), respectively, X is the vector of generalized
AN
coordinates, given by

X  q1 q2 qn u1  u2 u3
T
(31)
M

CNol and K Nol contain the nonlinear terms, which are the nonlinear damping and
nonlinear stiffness matrix, respectively, and F is the generalised force matrix.
ED

Eq. (30) consists of n  4 second-order nonlinear ordinary differential equations,

which are solved in the time domain by the Newmark method and the
PT

Newton–Raphson iteration method [21]. For the linear time varying model, the
equations of motion can also be obtained from Eq. (30) by setting the nonlinear terms
CE

to zero.
AC

2.4. Surface roughness

Surface roughness is one of the important factors of dynamic excitation. The
surface roughness can be represented with a random process that can be described by
a power spectral density function. In the present study, the power spectral density
function for road surface roughness is given as [26, 27]:

 2
S ()  S (0 )( ) (32)
0

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

where  the spatial frequency (cycle/m), S () the power spectral density,  0

-
the reference spatial frequency ( 0  0.1 m 1), S (0 ) is related to the pavement

quality, its value is prescribed in Table 1.

Surface profiles, r ( x) , are generated as the sum of a series of harmonics:

N
r ( x)   ak cos(2k x   k ) (33)
k 1

T
max  min

IP
where ak  2S (k )   ,   , K  min  k   , min the
N

CR
-
minimum spatial frequency ( min  0.01m 1), max the maximum spatial frequency

( max  10 m 1),  k is the random phase angle uniformly distributed in the interval
-

[0, 2 ] . US
AN
According to Eq. (33), the surface roughness of the beam at the contact points of
the rear tyre and the front tyre can be obtained as:
M

dr ( x)
r1 (t )  r ( x) x x , r1 (t )  V (34)
1 dx x x
1
ED

dr ( x)
r2 (t )  r ( x) x x , r2 (t )  V (35)
2 dx x x
2
PT

Using Eqs. (34) and (35), the generalized forces caused by the surface roughness can
be determined in Eqs. (28) and (29).
CE

3. Numerical simulations and results

3.1 Simple validation of the present method

AC

Example 1 In this section, we present some results about a mass traversing a

proportionally damped beam (see Fig.3). The beam is subject to two forces: the
weight and the inertia force of moving mass m . From Eqs.(18)-(20), the linear
governing equation of the moving mass model is easy to obtain by neglecting the
nonlinear terms

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

2w w EI  4 w mg m d 2 w( x, t )
 C   [   ] ( x  Vt ) H 2 (t ) (36)
t 2 t  A x 4  A  A dt 2
d

D
where C d  , D is the damping coefficient. The linear time varying model can
A
be solved by using Galerkin procedure and the Newmark method. This model is
similar to the linear model developed by Pesterev and Bergman [28]. The numerical

EI
values of the system parameters were as follows: L  6 m,  275.4408m 4 / s 2 ,
A

T
IP
m
 0.2 . Three variants of damping level were considered: (a) C d  0. , (b)
 AL

CR
C d  2. , and (c) C d  9. The modes number n used in all of the computations is 3.

US
The displacements curves ( w( , t ) ,   Vt ) corresponding to these cases are

depicted in Fig.4. The comparison shows excellent agreement with Pesterev and
AN
Bergman [28].

Example 2 The moving oscillator model shown in Fig.5 is considered in this section.
M

Using Eqs. (1)–(4), the equations of motion of the oscillator model are derived as
follows:
ED

m1z1  c( z1  z 2 )  k ( z1  z 2 )  m1 g  f ( x, t ) (37)

PT

m2 z2  c( z1  z 2 )  k ( z1  z 2 )  m2 g (38)

CE

where m1 and m 2 are non-suspended and suspended mass of the oscillator model,

respectively, c the damping coefficient related to suspension, k the stiffness

AC

coefficient related to suspension, f ( x, t ) ( x  Vt ) the interaction force at the wheel,

and z1 and z 2 is the vertical displacement of the non-suspended mass m1 and

suspended mass m 2 , respectively.

From Eq.(18), the linear governing equation of the beam is easy to obtain by
neglecting the nonlinear terms

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

2w w 4w
A  C  EI  f ( x, t ) ( x  Vt ) H 2 (t ) (39)
t 2 t x 4
d

Using Eqs. (37) and (38), the interaction force is given as

f ( x, t )  (m1  m2 ) g  (m1 z1  m2 z2 ) (40)

where the vertical displacement, z1 , at the contact point of the oscillator model and

the beam is not independent coordinate, which can be given below

T
z1  w( x, t ) x Vt (41)

IP
w( x, t ) w( x, t )
z1  V  (42)

CR
x x Vt t x Vt

 2 w( x, t )  2 w( x, t )  2 w( x, t )
z1  V 2  2V  (43)
x 2 x Vt
US xt

Numerical results, based on the coupled linear time varying mode (see Eq.(30),
x Vt
t 2 x Vt
AN
setting the nonlinear terms to zero), have been computed and plotted in order to
establish reasonable comparisons. The following dimensionless parameters [11] are
M

used:

V EI m1
  0.5 (   , b1   2 ) ,  0  0.25 (  0  ) ,   0.5
ED

 b1 L AL4 m2

(m1  m2 )  k1 c
(  ) ,   0.3 (   b1 ,  v  ) ,  v  0.125 (  v  ) ,
PT

AL v m2 2m 2  v

and the modal damping ratio is set to be 0.02. The response magnification factor is
CE

used in the results, which is defined as

w( x, t ) (m1  m2 ) gL3
Dd  ( Dst   ) (44)
AC

Dst 48EI

As can be seen from the comparisons (see Fig.6), the agreement with those in the
literature [11] is good.

3.2 Nonlinear vibration of the load-structure interaction

Several examples of applications of the methodology described in the above are
presented here. A sensitivity study was conducted to analyze the effect of key

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

parameters on the nonlinear vibration of the system. These parameters included the
roughness coefficient, the span, prestress, internal damping of the beam and moving
speed of the load. Table 2 was the mechanical properties used in all of the

 2 EI
computations unless otherwise specified. Pcr  is Euler’s buckling load. In all
L2

of numerical examples, zero initial conditions were assumed.

The linear and nonlinear dynamic responses computed for the beam and vehicle

T
have been plotted in Figs. 7 and 8. Fig. 7 shows the effect of the nonlinear on the

IP
displacements, velocities and accelerations of the beam at the midspan. Fig. 8 shows

CR
the effect of the nonlinear on the vertical displacements, vertical velocities and
vertical accelerations of the vehicle body. It can be seen that the dynamic responses of

US
the nonlinear analysis is higher than the one obtained from the linear solution. This
phenomenon was also noted elsewhere [22]. This incident is known as the softening
AN
behavior which is mostly due to the existence of the cubic non-linearities in the
equations of motion of the load-structure system, and hence this system is taken to be
M

equivalent to a nonlinear soft spring [25]. A free vibration with damping (decay) can
also be observed after the load departs from the beam in Fig. 7. Form this, one may
ED

also conclude that the nonlinear analyses are more expensive than the linear approach
with respect to both storage and CPU time.
PT

For different surface roughness of the beam, Fig. 9 displays the nonlinear
acceleration responses of the beam at the midspan and the vertical acceleration of the
CE

vehicle body. It is observed that the nonlinear acceleration responses of the beam and
the vertical acceleration of the vehicle body increase as the surface roughness
AC

increases (road class:B→C→D, see Table 1). This is due to the fact that the dynamic
excitation increases as the surface roughness coefficient increases.
The impact factor is an important parameter in the design of beams, and can be
defined [30] as follows:

Rd  R s
IP  (45)
Rs

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

where Rd and Rs are the absolute maximum responses at the midspan from the

dynamic and static studies respectively. Fig.10 shows that the impact factor at the
midspan decreases as the span L of the beam increases. The impact factor decreases
rapidly as the span L increases from 0 to 14m. However, when L is larger than
16m, the impact factor changes very slowly, and the impact factors are almost same for

different internal damping  of the beam. From this figure, it can also be said that

T
by increasing the value of internal damping  , the impact factor at the midspan

IP
decreases which is generally a natural phenomenon in any structural system.

CR
Designers may obtain the desirable dynamic characteristics adequate to design

purpose as they choose the span L and internal damping  appropriately.

US
Fig.11 illustrates the linear and nonlinear dynamic responses at the midspan of the
beam for different prestress loads. It is clear to see that the impact factor at the midspan
AN
increases with the increase of the prestress load. This phenomenon was also noted

elsewhere [31]. When P / Pcr >0.35, the difference between the linear and the
M

nonlinear model increases with the increase of the prestress loads. This is due to the
ED

fact that the stiffness of the beam will be reduced due to the influence of prestress, so
the beam is softened and the nonlinearity of the system increases.
PT

The impact factor is sensitive to the moving speed of the load. Fig.12 shows the
effect of the moving speed of the load on the impact factor. In this figure, the load
CE

velocity ranges from 5m/s to 85m/s. The maximum impact factor shows a peak,

which correspond to the critical velocity Vcr  50 m/s. It can be said that in the under
AC

critical velocity ( V < Vcr ) the impact factor of the beam generally increases by

increasing the moving speed of the load, and in the overcritical velocity ( V > Vcr ), the

impact factor decreases by increasing the moving speed of the load. The phenomenon
is also reported in linear moving force model [7]. According to the governing
equations (25), the critical velocity can also be defined as

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

L
Vcr  ( i  1,2,3 ) (46)
i
where  is the natural frequency of the load-structure system (see Eqs.(25)-(29),
neglecting the nonlinear terms ). The result calculated from Eq. (46) is agreement
with the numerical result in Fig.12.

4. Conclusions
This paper focuses on the nonlinear vibration and dynamic interaction of the beam

T
under moving loads. The numerical results show that the dynamic responses of the

IP
nonlinear analysis are higher than the one obtained from the linear solution, and the

CR
nonlinear responses of the beam and the vehicle body increase as the surface
roughness increases. The results also confirm that the impact factors decrease rapidly

US
as the span and the damping increase. However, when the span is larger, the impact
factor changes very slowly, and the impact factors are almost same for larger damping.
AN
Another finding is that the nonlinear dynamic responses, and the difference between
the the linear and the nonlinear model increase with the increasing of the prestress
load. Moreover, the critical velocity can be observed by the simulation results. The
M

meaningful results in the present paper are helpful for the application and the design
ED

of beams.

Acknowledgements
PT

The authors thank the supports of the Hunan Provincial Natural Science Foundation
of China under No. 13JJ4053.
CE

References
AC

[1] L. Frýba, Dynamics of Solids and Structures Under Moving Loads, Noordhoff
International Publishing, Groningen, The Netherlands, 1972.
[2] N. Azizi, M.M. Saadatpour, M. Mahzoon, Using spectral element method for
analyzing continuous beams and bridges subjected to a moving load, Appl. Math.
Model. 36 (2012) 3580–3592.
[3] S.A. Eftekhari, Differential quadrature procedure for in-plane vibration analysis of

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

variable thickness circular arches traversed by a moving point load, Appl. Math.
Model. 40 (2016) 4640–4663.
[4] S.S. Law, X.Q. Zhu, Bridge dynamic responses due to road surface roughness and
braking of vehicle, J. Sound Vib. 282 (2005) 805–830.
[5] K. Keivan, G.A. Hamidreza, N.K. Ardeshir, On the role of shear deformation in
dynamic behavior of a fully saturated poroelastic beam traversed by a moving load,
Int. J. Mech. Sci. 94-95 (2015) 84–95.

T
[6] Y.B. Yang, C.W. Lin, Vehicle–bridge interaction dynamics and potential

IP
applications, J. Sound Vib. 284 (2005) 205 –226.

CR
[7] P. Museros, E. Moliner, M.D. Martínez-Rodrigo, Free vibrations of
simply-supported beam bridges under moving loads: Maximum resonance,

US
cancellation and resonant vertical acceleration, J. Sound Vib. 332 (2013) 326
–345.
AN
[8] C.P. Sudheesh Kumar, C. Sujatha, K. Shankar, Vibration of simply supported
beams under a single moving load: A detailed study of cancellation phenomenon,
M

Int. J. Mech. Sci. 99 (2015) 40–47.

[9] C. Johansson, C. Pacoste, R. Karoumi, Closed-form solution for the mode
ED

superposition analysis of the vibration in multi-span beam bridges caused by

concentrated moving loads, Comput. Struct. 119 (2013) 85–94.
PT

[10] H. Ding, K.l. Shi, L.Q. Chen, S.P. Yang, Adomian polynomials for nonlinear
response of supported Timoshenko beams subjected to a moving harmonic load,
CE

Acta Mech Solida Sin 27 (2014) 383–393.

[11] D.Y. Zhu, Y.H. Zhang, H.A. Ouyang, Linear complementarity method for
AC

dynamic analysis of bridges under moving vehicles considering separation and

surface roughness, Comput. Struct. 154 (2015) 135 –144.
[12] Z. Dimitrovová, Critical velocity of a uniformly moving load on a beam
supported by a finite depth foundation, J. Sound. Vib. 366 (2016) 325–342.
[13] X.Q. He, M. Rafiee, S. Mareishi, K.M. Liew, Large amplitude vibration of
fractionally damped viscoelastic CNTs/fiber/polymer multiscale composite
beams, Compos. Struct. 131 (2015) 1111–1123.
17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[14] M. Şimşek, Nonlinear static and free vibration analysis of microbeams based
on the nonlinear elastic foundation using modified couple stress theory and He’s
variational method, Compos. Struct. 112 (2014) 264–272.
[15] Kefei Zhu, Jintai Chung, Nonlinear lateral vibrations of a deploying
Euler–Bernoulli beam with a spinning motion, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 90 (2015)
200–212.
[16] Jianshe Peng, Liu Yang, Fan Lin, Jie Yang, Dynamic analysis of size-dependent

T
micro-beams with nonlinear elasticity under electrical actuation, Appl. Math.

IP
Model. 43 (2017) 441–453.

CR
[17] Da Chen, Sritawat Kitipornchai, Jie Yang, Nonlinear free vibration of shear
deformable sandwich beam with a functionally graded porous core, Thin-Walled
Struct. 107 (2016) 39–48.
US
[18] M. Faraji Oskouie, R. Ansari, Linear and nonlinear vibrations of fractional
AN
viscoelastic Timoshenko nanobeams considering surface energy effects, Appl.
Math. Model. 43 (2017) 337–350.
M

[19] Łukasz Domagalski, Jarosław Jędrysiak, Geometrically nonlinear vibrations of

slender meso-periodic beams.The tolerance modeling approach, Compos. Struct.
ED

136 (2016) 270–277.

[20] S.S. Law, X.Q. Zhu, Nonlinear Characteristics of Damaged Concrete Structures
PT

under Vehicular Load, J. Struct. Eng. 131(8) (2005) 1277–1285.

[21] M. Şimşek, T. Kocatürk, Nonlinear dynamic analysis of an eccentrically
CE

prestressed damped beam under a concentrated moving harmonic load, J. Sound

Vib. 320 (2009) 235–253.
AC

[22] A. Mamandi, M.H. Kargarnovin, D. Younesian, Nonlinear dynamics of an

inclined beam subjected to a moving load, Nonlinear Dyn. 60 (2010) 277–293.
[23] C. Tao, Y.M. Fu, H.L. Dai, Nonlinear dynamic analysis of fiber metal laminated
beams subjected to moving loads in thermal environment, Compos. Struct. 140
(2016) 410 – 416.
[24] A. H. Karimi, S. Ziaei-Rad, Vibration analysis of a beam with moving support
subjected to a moving mass traveling with constant and variable speed, Commun.
18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simulat. 29 (2015) 372–390.

[25] A.H. Nayfeh, D.T. Mook, Nonlinear Oscillations, Wiley-Interscience, New York,
1979.
[26] O. Javier, M.G. José, A. Pablo, Á.A. Miguel, Relevance of a complete road
surface description in vehicle-bridge interaction dynamics, Eng. Struct. 56 (2013)
466–476.
[27] ISO-8608. Mechanical vibration-road surface profiles-reporting of measured

T
data.

IP
[28] A.V. Pesterev, L.A. Bergman, Response of a nonconservative continuous system

CR
to a moving co ncentrated load, J. Appl. Mech. 65 (1998) 436 – 444.
[29] S.S. Law, J.Q. Bu, X.Q. Zhu, S.L. Chan, Vehicle axle loads identification using

US
finite element method, Eng. Struct. 26 (2004) 1143–1153.
[30] X.Q. Zhu, S.S. Law, Dynamic load on continuous multi-lane bridge deck from
AN
moving vehicles, J. Sound Vib. 251 (2002) 697–716.
[31] H. Zhong, M.J. Yang, Z.L. Gao (Jerry), Dynamic responses of prestressed bridge
M

and vehicle through bridge-vehicle interaction analysis, Eng. Struct. 87 (2015)

116–125.
ED
PT
CE
AC

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

T
IP
CR
Fig. 1. Model of the load-structure system.

US
AN
M
ED
PT

Fig. 2 Differential element of the beam of length dx .

CE
AC

Fig. 3. Model of the moving mass system.

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

0.30 Present work

(a ) Pesterev et al.( 1998)
0.25

0.20

w(  , t) (m) 0.15

0.10

0.05

T
0.00
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

IP
t

CR
0.25 Present work
(b ) Pesterev et al.( 1998)
0.20
US
w(  , t) (m)

0.15
AN
0.10

0.05
M

0.00
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
t
ED
PT

0.15 Present work

(c )
Pesterev et al.( 1998)
0.12
CE w(  , t) (m)

0.09

0.06
AC

0.03

0.00
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
t

Fig. 4 Displacements of the mass moving with constant speed v  6 m/s on the

simply supported beam: (a) C d  0. (b) C d  2. (c) C d  9.

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

T
IP
Fig.5. Model of the moving oscillator system.

CR
(a )
1.8

1.5 US
Present work
Zhu et al. (2015)
Response factor Dd

1.2
AN
0.9

0.6
M

0.3

0.0
ED

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

t
PT

2.5
(b ) Present work
Response factor Dd

2.0 Zhu et al. (2015)

CE

1.5
AC

1.0

0.5

0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
t

Fig. 6. Response magnification factors of system: (a) displacement at the contact point
of the wheel and the beam, (b) displacement at the midspan of the beam.

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

0.04
(a )
0.00

w( L/2,t) (m)
-0.04

linear
-0.08 nonlinear

-0.12

T
IP
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
t (s)

CR
(b )

US
AN
M
ED
PT

(c)
CE
AC

Fig. 7. Time history responses of the beam midspan: (a) vertical displacement, (b)
vertical velocity, (c) vertical acceleration.

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(a ) linear
0.00
nonlinear
-0.05

u1(m)
-0.10

-0.15

-0.20

T
IP
0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5
t (s)

CR
(b )

US
AN
M
ED
PT

(c )
CE
AC

Fig. 8. Time history responses of the vehicle body: (a) vertical displacement, (b)
vertical velocity, (c) vertical acceleration.

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(a )

T
IP
CR
US
AN
(b)
M
ED
PT
CE

Fig. 9 Effect of the surface roughness of the beam on the time history responses: (a)
AC

vertical acceleration of the vehicle body, (b) vertical acceleration of the beam
midspan.

25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1.2

 = 0.05
0.9
 = 0.07

T
 = 0.09
0.6

IP
IP

CR
0.3

9 12 15 18 21

US
L (m)

Fig.10. Effects of the span L and internal damping  of the beam on impact
AN
factors.
M
ED

0.6
PT

linear
0.5 nonlinear
CE

0.4
IP

0.3
AC

0.2
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
P/Pcr

Fig.11. Effect of the prestress load of the beam on impact factors.

26
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1.0
linear nonlinear
0.8

0.6
IP

T
0.4

IP
0.2

CR
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
V (m/s)

US
Fig.12. Effect of the moving speed of the load on impact factors.
AN
M
ED
PT
CE
AC

27
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 1. Classification of road roughness [26].

road class S (0 ) (m3)

-6
A (Very good) 16×10

-6
B (Good) 64×10

T
-6

IP
C (Medium) 256×10

-6

CR
D (Poor) 1024×10

-6
E (Very poor) 4096×10

US
AN
Table 2. Parameters of the load-structure system [21, 29].
Beam Vehicle

L  20 m I1  1.47 105 kgm2 m1  17735 kg

M

E  35 Gpa   4.27 m e1  2.05 m

ED

A  1500 kg/m e2  2.22 m m2  1000 kg

PT

  0.02 s m3  1500 kg k1  2.47 106 N/m

P  0.2 Pcr k2  3.74 106 N/m k3  4.23 106 N/m

CE

A  0.36 m2 k4  4.60 106 N/m c1  4.00 104 N/m/s

AC

I  0.0192 m4 c2  4.30 103 N/m/s c3  3.00 104 N/m/s

S (0 )  64 106 m3 c4  3.90 103 N/m/s V  15 m/s

28