Abstract

Floating bridges face potential hazards due to ship collisions throughout their operational lifetime. In a situation where a pontoon is significantly damaged from an accident, a floating drydock may be used to compensate for the lost buoyancy and provide a dry atmosphere for operations. As the repair might take months, a primary concern is whether the repair can be in-site conducted without shutting down the road traffic. This study aims to investigate the feasibility of using a drydock for the repair. The numerical model of the in-operation damaged bridge is established for a comparative dynamic analysis with the intact end-anchored bridge. Eigenvalue analysis is conducted, and pendulum modes of oscillation are found with an eigen-period of around 15 s. The dynamic responses are analyzed through a series of fully coupled time-domain simulations under various environmental conditions. The results indicate that the standard deviation of the moment about the girder weak axis increases significantly at the damaged pontoon axis due to the excitation of low-frequency resonant response. Swell wave loads might induce dynamic amplification to the damaged bridge, even with a relatively small wave height. In addition, the internal stress of the bridge girder is investigated and found to be larger, especially, at the lower locations of the cross section. It is suggested that the responses can be managed by limiting the excitation of pendulum modes or providing special damping devices in practical engineering.

Graphical Abstract Figure
Graphical Abstract Figure
Close modal

References

1.
Eidem
,
M. E.
,
2017
, “
Overview of Floating Bridge Projects in Norway
,”
Proceedings of the ASME 2017 36th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering
,
Trondheim, Norway
,
June 25–30
, p. V009T12A018.
2.
Skorpa
,
L.
,
Jakobsen
,
B.
, and
Østlid
,
H.
,
2017
, “
Prof. Torgeir Moan and the Record-Breaking Fjord Crossings in Norway
,”
Proceedings of the ASME 2017 36th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering.
,
Trondheim, Norway
,
June 25–30
, p. V009T12A012.
3.
Kvåle
,
K. A.
,
Sigbjörnsson
,
R.
, and
Øiseth
,
O.
,
2016
, “
Modelling the Stochastic Dynamic Behaviour of a Pontoon Bridge: A Case Study
,”
Comput. Struct.
,
165
, pp.
123
135
.
4.
Xu
,
Y.
,
Øiseth
,
O.
,
Moan
,
T.
, and
Naess
,
A.
,
2018
, “
Prediction of Long-Term Extreme Load Effects Due to Wave and Wind Actions for Cable-Supported Bridges with Floating Pylons
,”
Eng. Struct.
,
172
, pp.
321
333
.
5.
Xiang
,
X.
,
Viuff
,
T.
,
Leira
,
B.
, and
Øiseth
,
O.
,
2018
, “
Impact of Hydrodynamic Interaction Between Pontoons on Global Responses of a Long Floating Bridge Under Wind Waves
,”
Proceedings of the ASME 2018 37th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering
,
Madrid, Spain
,
June 17–22
, p. V07AT06A049.
6.
Moan
,
T.
, and
Eidem
,
M. E.
,
2019
, “
Floating Bridges and Submerged Tunnels in Norway – The History and Future Outlook
,”
Proceedings of the WCFS2019: Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering
,
Singapore
,
Apr. 22–23
, pp.
81
112
.
7.
Wang
,
Z.
,
Sha
,
Y.
, and
Jakobsen
,
J. B.
,
2023
, “
Floating Bridge Response Under Combined Ship Collision, Wind and Wave Loads
,”
Ships Offshore Struct.
, pp.
1
18
.
8.
Jin
,
Y.
,
Moan
,
T.
, and
Sha
,
Y.
,
2021
, “
Numerical Study of the Structural Consequences of Ship Impacts on a Floating Bridge in a Risk Analysis Perspective
,”
Proceedings of the MARSTRUCT 2021 8th International Conference on Marine Structures
,
Trondheim, Norway
,
June
, pp.
204
214
.
9.
Sha
,
Y.
, and
Amdahl
,
J.
,
2017
, “
Ship Collision Analysis of a Floating Bridge in Ferry-Free E39 Project
,”
Proceedings of the ASME 2017 36th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering
,
Trondheim, Norway
,
June 25–30
, p. V009T12A021.
10.
Cheng
,
Z.
,
Svangstu
,
E.
,
Gao
,
Z.
, and
Moan
,
T.
,
2019
, “
Long-Term Joint Distribution of Environmental Conditions in a Norwegian Fjord for Design of Floating Bridges
,”
Ocean Eng.
,
191
, p.
106472
.
11.
Cheng
,
Z.
,
Svangstu
,
E.
,
Gao
,
Z.
, and
Moan
,
T.
,
2021
, “
Assessment of Inhomogeneity in Environmental Conditions in a Norwegian Fjord for Design of Floating Bridges
,”
Ocean Eng.
,
220
, p.
108474
.
12.
Cheng
,
Z.
,
Gao
,
Z.
, and
Moan
,
T.
,
2019
, “
Numerical Modeling and Dynamic Response Analysis of a Floating Bridge Subjected to Wind, Wave and Current Loads
,”
ASME J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng.
,
141
(
1
), p.
011601
.
13.
Cheng
,
Z.
,
Gao
,
Z.
, and
Moan
,
T.
,
2018
, “
Hydrodynamic Load Modeling and Analysis of a Floating Bridge in Homogeneous Wave Conditions
,”
Mar. Struct.
,
59
, pp.
122
141
.
14.
Cui
,
M.
,
Cheng
,
Z.
, and
Moan
,
T.
,
2022
, “
A Generic Method for Assessment of Inhomogeneous Wave Load Effects of Very Long Floating Bridges
,”
Mar. Struct.
,
83
, p.
103186
.
15.
Vegvesen
,
S.
,
2017
,
K7 Bjørnafjorden end-Anchored Floating Bridge
,
Oslo, Norway
.
16.
MARINTEK
,
2018
,
Simo Theory Manual
,
Trondheim, Norway
.
17.
MARINTEK
,
2018
,
Riflex Theory Manual
,
Trondheim, Norway
.
18.
Xiang
,
X.
, and
Løken
,
A.
,
2019
, “
Hydroelastic Analysis and Validation of an End-Anchored Floating Bridge Under Wave and Current Loads
,”
Proceedings of the ASME 2019 38th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering
,
Glasgow, Scotland, UK
,
June 9–14
, p. V009T12A018.
19.
Rodrigues
,
J. M.
,
Viuff
,
T.
, and
Økland
,
O. D.
,
2022
, “
Model Tests of a Hydroelastic Truncated Floating Bridge
,”
Appl. Ocean Res.
,
125
, p.
103247
.
20.
Viuff
,
T.
,
Xiang
,
X.
,
Leira
,
B. J.
, and
Øiseth
,
O.
,
2020
, “
Software-to-Software Comparison of End-Anchored Floating Bridge Global Analysis
,”
J. Bridge Eng.
,
25
(
5
).
21.
Sha
,
Y.
, and
Amdahl
,
J.
,
2019
, “
Numerical Investigations of a Prestressed Pontoon Wall Subjected to Ship Collision Loads
,”
Ocean Eng.
,
172
, pp.
234
244
.
22.
WAMIT, Inc.
,
2020
,
WAMIT User Manual
,
Chestnut Hill, MA
, https://www.wamit.com/.
23.
Vegvesen
,
S.
,
2016
,
Design Basis Metocean
,
Oslo, Norway
.
24.
Jonkman
,
B. J.
“Turbsim User’s Guide: Version 1.50.” National Renewable Energy Laboratory. 2009. Golden, CO, Technical Report No. NREL/TP500-46198.
25.
Naess
,
A.
, and
Moan
,
T.
,
2012
,
Stochastic Dynamics of Marine Structures
,
Cambridge University
,
Cambridge, UK
.
26.
Cheng
,
Y.
,
Fu
,
L.
,
Dai
,
S.
,
Collu
,
M.
,
Cui
,
L.
,
Yuan
,
Z.
, and
Incecik
,
A.
,
2022
, “
Experimental and Numerical Analysis of a Hybrid WEC-Breakwater System Combining an Oscillating Water Column and an Oscillating Buoy
,”
Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev.
,
169
, p.
112909
.
27.
Moan
,
T.
, and
Jin
,
Y.
,
2022
,
Risk Analysis of a Floating Bridge Subjected to Ship Collisions
,
Department of Marine Technology, NTNU
,
Trondheim
.
28.
Cheng
,
Y.
,
Fu
,
L.
,
Dai
,
S.
,
Collu
,
M.
,
Ji
,
C.
,
Yuan
,
Z.
, and
Incecik
,
A.
,
2022
, “
Experimental and Numerical Investigation of WEC-Type Floating Breakwaters: A Single-Pontoon Oscillating Buoy and a Dual-Pontoon Oscillating Water Column
,”
Coastal Eng.
,
177
, p.
104188
.
You do not currently have access to this content.