Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Dynamic response of a damaged masonry rail viaduct: Measurement and T

interpretation
⁎
Sinan Acikgozd, , Matthew J. DeJongb, Cedric Kechavarzia, Kenichi Sogac
a
Centre for Smart Infrastructure and Construction, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
b
Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
c
University of California, Berkeley, United States
d
Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, United Kingdom

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Despite recent advances in modelling and testing techniques, assessing the serviceability of ageing masonry rail
Masonry rail bridge bridges remains a significant challenge. Most assessment methods are based on ultimate strength, while reliable
Fibre Bragg grating measurement-based assessment criteria are lacking. This paper aims to improve the understanding of service-
Digital image correlation ability behaviour through detailed dynamic monitoring of the bridge locally (e.g. in locations of damage) and
Structural health monitoring
globally (e.g. interaction of different components). Quasi distributed sensing techniques (Fibre Bragg Grating
cables and Digital Image Correlation) were used to quantify the bridge dynamic response through extensive
measurement of strains and displacements. Specifically, these techniques were applied to two damaged spans of
the Marsh Lane viaduct in Leeds, UK. A detailed investigation of the dynamic pier and arch barrel movements
reveal how the response mechanisms relate to, and likely propagate, the existing damage. For instance, rotation
of piers in the bridge longitudinal plane causes significant span opening and closing, which in turn causes the
skewbacks and backing to rock on the piers. This is accompanied by flexural deformation of the arch, which
forces the existing transverse cracks to experience high compressive strains. Similarly, the transverse rotation of
piers due to the presence of the relieving arches causes spreading of the relieving arches and opening of the
longitudinal crack above. These observations provide new insight into behaviour and lead to suggestions for
improving assessment techniques for masonry viaducts.

1. Introduction static loading, and hence the capacity of a masonry viaduct, involves
the interaction of two or more spans [6]. Other research has demon-
In the last decades, passenger and freight numbers have been ra- strated the significant influence of arch backing [7], ring separation [8]
pidly increasing on the European rail network [1]. In the UK, this has and the presence of spandrel walls [9] on load carrying capacity.
been accompanied by a 20% increase in the axle weight of modern However, most masonry bridges experience progressive damage for
vehicles and an increase in maximum line speeds on some railway service loading well below their predicted ultimate capacity [10]. This
routes [2]. Increased loading demands requires re-assessment, which causes their safety to be questioned as further damage and material
can be a complicated task for ageing rail infrastructure. For instance, degradation, which can occur due to cyclic environmental or dynamic
masonry arch bridges constitute 60% of the European bridge stock [3]. loading, can decrease the load resistance. Accurately predicting the
Most masonry bridges were constructed before the 20th century, and progressive damage for masonry bridges would require replicating the
were not designed to sustain the increased loading that has occurred. effects of the loading history, modelling the existing damage and si-
Therefore, the engineering community have focused on developing mulating the dynamic response of the damaged structure to further
reliable methods to determine the ultimate load carrying capacity of cyclic loads with appropriate degradation models. However, significant
masonry arch bridges. These studies provide valuable understanding of uncertainties exist in identifying typical sources and propagation of
the complex mechanical behaviour of masonry bridges (see [4] and the damage observed in masonry arch rail bridges. These uncertainties limit
references therein). Importantly, they distinguish between the beha- the ability of uncalibrated computational models to capture critical
viour of single span arch bridges and arched viaducts with multiple progressive damage mechanisms.
spans [5]. They also establish that the limiting failure mechanism under To advance the current understanding of the serviceability response

⁎
Corresponding author at: Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, 15 Parks Road, OX1 3PJ.
E-mail address: sinan.acikgoz@eng.ox.ac.uk (S. Acikgoz).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.04.054
Received 4 September 2017; Received in revised form 10 April 2018; Accepted 16 April 2018
Available online 09 May 2018
0141-0296/ © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY/4.0/).
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

of masonry bridges, field measurements to quantify the current damage arches are on a gently curving section of the railway. At the location of
state of the structure are essential. In recent years, useful non-contact arches 37 and 38, the curvature is primarily achieved by varying the
methods have been developed to achieve this [11–15]. These include pier thicknesses by approximately 0.25 m across the bridge width. The
(a) ultrasound testing to determine the surface material characteristics, average pier thickness is approximately 0.85 m. It is noteworthy that
(b) ground penetrating radar surveys to determine the interior structure the piers are not completely solid. Relieving arches consisting of 3 rings
and (c) laser scan surveys to determine the current distorted geometry and spanning 2.5 m lies in the middle of the piers. This relieving arch is
of the structure. These techniques, alongside traditional measurements visible in the photo in Fig. 1b, which was taken in July 2015. Fig. 2, a
such as crack measurement and hammer tapping, provide important photo taken shortly after the remedial works in September 2015, shows
information regarding the damage state of the existing asset. the same arch filled with concrete.
For assessments, it is equally important to capture the dynamic re- Table 1 lists the key dimensions of Arches 37 and 38. The height of
sponse of the structure to cyclic loads and document its degradation the brick piers from the ground level is measured as 2.7 m, although the
process. Traditional monitoring tools, such as displacement gauges, foundations of the bridge run deeper. During the remedial works, it was
tiltmetres, strain gauges and accelerometers, are typically used for this observed that the relieving arch has a mirror image invert beneath the
purpose [16–20]. However, these techniques capture the local beha- current ground level and a corbelled foundation underneath. Assuming
viour of the material and are difficult to interpret without multiple that the invert lies just under the ground level with a 0.5 m foundation
measurements at different locations [21]. In contrast, quasi-distributed underneath, suggests that the total pier height from the bottom of the
monitoring techniques, such as sensing with Fibre Bragg Gratings foundation is approximately 5.2 m. The construction of the arch above
(FBGs) and digital image correlation (DIC), make it feasible to obtain its pier is shown on the right side of Table 1. Both investigated arches
strain and displacement measurements across wide areas of the struc- have an approximate span of 7.7 m and a width of 8 m. According to
ture. Direct strain and displacement measurement is useful because this schematic, a series of large skewback stones, approximately 0.6 m
visible damage in a masonry arch may not always quantify the active high, were placed above the pier, along the width of the bridge. The
degradation processes. Further, distributed techniques enable local primary arch barrels have 4 rings with a total thickness of ∼0.5 m and a
measurements around locations of damage (e.g. cracks), as well as rise of 1.8 m. Just above the skewback, there is evidence of a 1.15 m
global displacement measurements (e.g. span opening and closing) si- layer of backing, including the coinciding presence of drainage holes
multaneously. Useful quantities, such as rotation and crack opening, and horizontal cracking on the spandrel wall. Above the backing, a
can be determined by post-processing, in order to identify the gov- layer of compacted earth fill supports the ballasted tracks, and is con-
erning response mechanisms. tained from both sides by 0.5 m thick spandrel walls. Further in-
This paper describes a novel application of the aforementioned formation was not available on the properties of materials used in the
quasi-distributed techniques for monitoring a masonry viaduct and construction of the bridge.
demonstrates the understanding of structural response that can be ob- The side photo of the bridge in Fig. 2 highlights visible structural
tained from a comprehensive monitoring programme. To do this, two damage as well as the related structural interventions. The photo shows
spans of the Marsh Lane Viaduct in Leeds, UK, are investigated. The the north-facing spandrel wall of Arch 38, where significant damage has
structure, the observed damage, the monitoring installation, and the concentrated. The damage includes horizontal cracks on the spandrel
data processing are first discussed, followed by the interpretation of wall, which appear due to higher flexural stiffness of the spandrel wall
measurements to understand the complex three-dimensional dynamic in comparison to the arch barrel [7]. There is also evidence of partial
behaviour. The response to a typical passenger train is examined in separation between the spandrel wall and the extrados of the arch
detail, followed by the investigation of the bridge response to different (Fig. 2). These damages have led to repointing on the western side of
vehicles and evaluation of degradation over a six month monitoring the 38N spandrel wall. Signs of damage and interventions can also be
interval. observed on the piers. In particular, water drainage issues have affected
the western pier of Arch 38, which has been repointed. In addition, the
2. The investigated structure significant use of steel ties can be observed. In the 1990s, ties were
installed through the arch barrel to limit further opening of longitudinal
Marsh Lane viaduct is a masonry viaduct on the Leeds-Selby route barrel cracks. In September 2015, several other ties were installed; ties
(see Fig. 1a). The investigated section, which comprises of Arches 37 on the piers were located close to the ground level, to arrest transverse
and 38, was constructed during the North Eastern Railway Leeds Ex- movements of the piers, whereas the ties on the spandrel walls aimed to
tension between 1865 and 1869 [22]. The bridge carries two electrified prevent bulging.
tracks, and has a speed limit of 35 mph. Damage visible from the underside of Arch 38 is discussed with
The plan view of the viaduct in Fig. 1a shows that the investigated annotated photos in Fig. 3. In particular, the significant movements and

Fig. 1. (Left) Plan view drawing of a section of the Marsh Lane viaduct (British Railways drawing 73-YWR-513) and (Right) a photo showing the southern side view
of the investigated arches 37 and 38.

545
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

Fig. 2. A photo showing the northern side view of Arch 38. Annotated boxes draw attention to signs of structure damage and related maintenance works.

Table 1
A summary of the key characteristics of the tracks on the Marsh Lane viaduct alongside geometric characteristics of the investigated Arch 38.
Structure Route RA number Number of tracks Speed limit (mph)
Marsh Lane viaduct Leeds-Selby 10 2 35
Structure Bridge Span (m) Bridge Rise (m) Bridge Width (m) Arch thickness (m)
Arch 38 7.7 1.8 8 0.5
Skewback height (m) Backing Height (m) Pier thickness (m) Estimated pier height (m)
Arch 38 0.6 1.15 0.85, varying 5.2

rotations observed in the western pier are shown in Fig. 3b. The may not have arrested the transverse separation movement of the piers
skewback stones decline in elevation on both sides of the relieving arch, completely. Two other noteworthy signs of damage were observed for
reaching a minimum elevation just above the crown, indicating a Arch 38 in Fig. 3a. The first relates to rounding and cracking of skew-
spreading mechanism in the relieving arch. This mechanism is accom- back stones at their edges along the bridge longitudinal direction. Prior
panied by visible cracking of the relieving arch around its crown and to repair works, it was noticed that these stones rotate visibly on piers
significant openings between the skewback stones. The transverse ro- in the bridge longitudinal direction during the passage of trains [23].
tation of pier bricks below and above the springing of the relieving arch The other significant damage that was observed relates to transverse
(illustrated in Fig. 3b) also relate to this mechanism. It is likely that the cracking of the arch barrel just above the backing of the pier between
spreading mechanism and transverse pier rotations are due to the load Arches 37 and 38, and related water ingress. In-depth analysis of bridge
path which imparts considerable vertical live loads on the relieving geometry from laser scan surveys indicated that the cracking was in
arch. The relieving arch then thrusts on the piers in the bridge trans- response to the aforementioned spreading and vertical depression of the
verse direction, causing them to rotate towards the spandrel walls. As relieving arch between Arches 37 and 38 [15]. The schematics in Fig. 3c
mentioned earlier, the relieving arch was filled with concrete in Sep- summarise the damage observed on the western pier of Arch 38 and
tember 2015. arch barrel intrados of Arches 37 and 38 and emphasise widespread
The relieving arch spreading mechanism caused damage in the arch nature of existing damage. In order to determine the response me-
barrel, which is shown in Fig. 3a. For instance, in the western side of chanism of the bridge and understand the causes of degradation,
Arch 38, a longitudinal crack which emanates from the relieving arch is monitoring the response of the structure in many different locations
visible. This crack is due to the rotation of the northern pier towards the was necessary.
northern spandrel wall (see Fig. 3b). The crack is 3 cm wide at the arch
springing and reduces to a hairline crack at the quarter span. It is in-
3. Monitoring techniques
teresting that the crack does not follow a straight line but branches out
in two directions. During the September 2015 repair works, all of these
This section describes the application of the FBG and DIC sensing
cracks were grouted and stitched. However, by July 2016, hairline
techniques, which were used to monitor Arches 37 and 38. FBG tech-
cracks appeared through the grout, suggesting that the repair works
nology utilises a Germanium doped single mode silica fibre. The fibre is

546
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

Fig. 3. Annotated photos of (a) the western part of the arch barrel 38 and (b) the pier on the northwest side of the same arch. (c) The observed damage is summarised
with the schematic drawings of Arches 37 and 38.

subjected to ultraviolet light with a phase mask to create gratings (areas guaranteeing a strain measurement range of ± 1500με . To ensure that
with modified refractive index) on the cable. When a light pulse is sent the fibre was robust enough for external use, a new fibre configuration
into the fibre, each grating reflects the light at a particular wavelength was developed in collaboration with the manufacturer (FBGS Interna-
λ 0 while transmitting the rest of the signal. This backscatter central tional NV, Geel, Belgium). The 125 μm core of this fibre consisted of a
wavelength, denoted by λ, is sensitive to changes in temperature and 6 μm inner core with a high reflective index, surrounded by an outer
strain [24]. Since only transient dynamic data is investigated, the in- core of glass, with a lower reflective index. The core is coated with
fluence of temperature changes on the wavelength data is negligible. organic modified ceramic to prevent water ingress. The external layers
Therefore, observed changes in wavelength Δλ = λ−λ 0 can be used to of Glass-Fibre Reinforced Polymer (1 mm thick) and High Density
calculate changes in axial strain Δε as follows: Polymer (0.5 mm thick) provide stiffness and further protection against
elements. The fibre was spliced to a standard telecom extension cable,
Δλ to route the cables to a monitoring location under the arches, (see
Δε =
λ 0 (1−ρe ) (1) Fig. 4b). The central wavelengths of gratings in each array were kept in
the 1510–1590 nm range, which defines the bandwidth of the Micron-
where the constant ρe = 0.23, and is defined as the effective photo- Optics sm-130 fibre optic interrogator. A fibre optic multiplexer was
elastic constant of the fibre core material and was determined through used to near-simultaneously record the strains in 120 FBGs at a sam-
calibration tests at the laboratory. pling rate of 250 Hz. The sensing system could achieve a strain re-
Six custom designed arrays of fibre optic cable with 120 gratings solution of 1 με . The fibre optic cable was fixed on the bricks using
were used to detect the axial strains on the masonry structure (Fig. 4a). precision machined aluminium clamps, typically placed 1 m apart. The
Each array featured a fibre optic cable with twenty low reflectivity fibre was prestrained to approximately 500 με, to detect compression as
(< 20%) gratings, placed 1 m apart. Each grating on the fibre had a well as tension.
central wavelength which differed from the next grating by 4 nm,

547
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

Fig. 4. Photos of (a) the installed fibre optic cable and clamps, (b) the fibre optic analyser with a multiplexer and (c) the Imetrum video camera. The schematics (d)
demonstrate the location configurations of the video cameras for digital image correlation.

A commercial DIC system (Imetrum Ltd., Bristol, UK) was used to algorithm, the out-of-plane effects were quantified and removed from
monitor the displacements of the viaduct. This system complemented DIC measurements [25]. The corrected DIC monitoring data in the XY
the fibre optic system, as it could be used to estimate rigid body rota- coordinate plane, and the estimated transverse movement data in the Z
tions of masonry arch segments. The DIC system consisted of two video direction, are presented in this paper. In relation, FBG sensors were
cameras and a system controller (see Fig. 4c). The cameras recorded used to measure strains in the transverse direction of the bridge. Two
videos of the monitored structure at a 50 Hz frame rate. Data processing transverse monitoring lines were located at approximately the quarter
consisted of tracking the sub-pixel position of natural brick texture in spans of each arch, as illustrated on the right side of Fig. 5b. In Arch 38,
the image, accomplished using the Imetrum software, and scaling of the transverse monitoring line 38W features 7 clamps (T1-T7); strains
pixel movements to metric movements with the use of a new registra- are measured between each clamp. For instance, T2-T3 measured
tion technique proposed by the authors [25]. In order to understand the transverse strain under the tracks, whereas T4-T5 measured strain over
viaduct behaviour, two different camera location configurations, which the tip of the longitudinal crack.
are presented in Fig. 4d, were investigated with 2D DIC. In the first A pilot installation of the fibre optic sensors in Arch 37 was done in
configuration C1, the cameras monitored planar movements of Arches January 2016. These sensors were left in place and more fibre optic
37 and 38 in the vertical plane directly under the northern tracks, sensors were installed in Arch 38 in July 2016, where the DIC system
aligned with the bridge longitudinal axis. These planes correspond to was also used. DIC and FBG systems independently gathered data, and
unique XY planes, referred to as 37N and 38N. In the second config- were synchronised later by best-matching the time stamps of peaks of
uration C2, the cameras monitored the movements in the vertical the common measurement of span opening and closing at the pier top,
planes lying under the northern and southern tracks of Arch 38 along denoted by Δ(WP−EP) . The synchronised measurements were related
the bridge longitudinal axis, respectively referred to as 38N and 38S. In to the position of axles using videos of the train on the viaduct.
both configurations, the cameras were positioned centrally in line with To investigate the structural response, loading information is ne-
the crown of the arches. This setup allowed capturing all the targets cessary. Several different trains use the Leeds-Selby line, most notably
with a 0.08 mm resolution in each plane from a single position. British Rail Class 185, 155 and 144 trains. The characteristics of these
The FBG monitoring lines were used to monitor the strains in the trains are examined in Fig. 6. Class 185 is a diesel multiple unit vehicle
same planes investigated by DIC. A photo of one of these planes, 38S, is with a wide wheelbase. The distance between the two bogie centres in
shown in Fig. 5a. In this figure, the annotations show the locations of each carriage is 16 m, which is approximately double the distance be-
pier monitoring targets WP and EP and arch monitoring targets A1-A9. tween consecutive pier centrelines dcr of the investigated arches.
A similar arrangement was used for monitoring the other longitudinal Therefore, the normalised wheelbase is approximately 2. A typical
planes on 38N, 37N and 38S (see Fig. 5b). In this arrangement, FBG bogie weight is 33 tons. The additional passenger weights are typically
sensors measured the strains between consecutive locations, such as A1- negligible compared to the train weight. Class 155 trains have similar
A2 and WP-EP, while the 2D DIC technique, from which data was dimensions as class 185 trains, but each bogie weighs approximately
collected at the same locations, measured the absolute displacement of 40% less. Class 144 trains were converted in the 1980 s from disused
targets in the horizontal direction X and vertical direction Y. These buses. The distance between the front and back axles of each carriage is
absolute displacements were used to calculate relative displacements, 9 m, which is approximately equal to the distance between consecutive
to obtain the strain. The discrepancy between corresponding FBG and pier centrelines, approximately corresponding to a wheelbase of 1. In
DIC relative displacement (strain) measurements were largely due to addition, Class 144 trains weigh approximately one third of the Class
out of plane movements which affected DIC measurements. With a new 185 trains.

548
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

(a) T4

A6 A5 A4 T5
A7 Fibre T6 A3
T7 A2
A8
A9 A1

EP E, X WP

(b)

Fig. 5. (a) A south looking photo showing a side view of the longitudinal monitoring plane 38S. The annotations denote the unique ID for each clamp, where fibre
optic cables are fixed and DIC tracks the natural brick and mortar pattern. (b) Schematics outline the approximate location of all monitoring lines and clamps.

As examined in [25], the train response data was quasi-static; dy- with different speeds on the same plot. Fig. 6c shows the position of the
namic effects were minimal. Therefore, it is possible to normalise the axles of an eastbound Class 185 train on Arch 38 in three instances. At
time data with the speed v of each train (determined from peak loca- the first instance, τ1 = 3.5, the front bogie of the leading carriage is
tions and known train distances) and dcr of the investigated span. In- above the crown of Arch 38. In the second instance, τ2 = 4.5, the leading
vestigating the data plotted against normalised and translated (with τ0 ) axles have moved one span further. In the third instance, τ3 = 5.35, the
v
dimensionless time τ = d t + τo allows evaluation of data from trains back axle of the leading carriage is above the crown of Arch 38, while
cr

Fig. 6. (a) A table summarising the relevant char-

acteristic of frequently observed Class 185, 155 and
144 trains on the Leeds-Selby route, alongside (b)
their photos, ordered respectively from top to bottom
and taken from [29–31] (c) Schematics illustrate the
relative location of the axles of a Class 185 train, as it
passes over the Arch 38.

549
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

Table 2 repeatability of data, which has been examined in detail elsewhere

Properties of the investigated datasets. [25]. Additionally, the highlighted instances indicate that at τ = 3.5, the
Datasets Date Camera configuration Train model Direction Speed axle over the crown of 38N pushes the piers outwards, causing the 38N
(see Fig. 4d) (see Fig. 6) (mph) span to open by about 0.7 mm. At τ = 4.5, the axles located over the
crowns of the neighbouring spans push the piers inwards, causing a
DS1 07.16 C1 185 E 30.9
similar magnitude of span closing. At τ = 5.35, span opening is observed
DS3 07.16 C2 185 E 31.2
DS9 07.16 C2 185 W 30.0
due to an axle located above the crown of 38N. However, the span
DS11 01.16 No cameras 185 E 30.9 opening has a reduced magnitude of 0.35 mm, since an axle above the
DS12 07.16 C2 155 E 30.9 neighbouring pier of 37N does not allow movement of the pier in the
DS13 07.16 C1 144 E 29 direction of X between Arches 37 and 38. These instances are repeated
several times during the passage of a train.
Fig. 7b illustrates the span opening and closing in monitoring planes
the front axle of the second carriage is above Arch 37. These instances
37N and 38S for DS1 and DS3. All of these signals show a similar
are repeated cyclically throughout the train passage. Data points at
characteristic trace. However, the span opening and closing of 37N is
these specific instances are highlighted for discussions throughout the
offset in time. While a span opening is observed for 38N at τ = 3.5, the
paper. The six datasets investigated and compared in this paper
pier movements due to axles over Arches 36 & 38 cause span closing in
(Table 2) describe the structural response to different trains travelling
37N. It is notable that the maximum span opening of 0.6 mm for 37N is
in different directions.
smaller than the maximum opening of 0.7 mm for 38N. Similarly, the
span opening trace of 38S, located under the southern track, experi-
ences a smaller maximum span opening of 0.3 mm. This indicates a
4. Pier response mechanisms
torsional rotation of the pier in the XZ plane between Arches 37 and 38,
resulting in larger northern pier top movements in comparison to the
This section examines the longitudinal and transverse response of
south.
the piers during the passage of a Class 185 train. Datasets 1 and 3
Fig. 7c describes the absolute displacement ΔX at the western and
(denoted by DS1 and DS3, see Table 2) describe the response to an
eastern pier monitoring targets WP and EP for Arches 37 and 38 for
eastbound train which passes over the northern tracks. In Fig. 7a, the
DS1. The western and eastern piers of Arch 38N move in opposite di-
opening and closing of span 38N at the top of the piers (i.e. the relative
rections to allow span opening at the instance τ = 3.5 although the
displacement between monitoring targets WP-EP, denoted by
movements at the damaged western pier are larger in magnitude.
Δ(WP−EP) ) is shown. Here, and in the rest of the paper, the positive
Furthermore, at the third highlighted instance τ = 5.35 it can be seen
sign convention of one of the datasets in the graph (the line with
that the target 38N WP moves only slightly in the X direction, due to
highlighted instances) is demonstrated by the inset illustration of a
axles on either side of this pier. Meanwhile, 38N EP moves freely,
bridge cross-section in the XY plane in accordance with Fig. 6. In this
causing the span opening. In addition, the figure plots the ΔX dis-
case, positive values of Δ(WP−EP) indicate span opening whereas ne-
placement of 37N EP. This movement of this target is similar to that of
gative values indicate span closing. The data shows a near-identical
38N WP, which indicates that opposite sides of the same pier move
response for two similar trains (DS1 and DS3) despite different DIC
together. The vertical axial strains recorded on the pier between Arches
configurations (C1 and C2, see Fig. 4). This demonstrates the

Fig. 7. Pier top displacement time histories from DS1

and DS3 with highlighted instances: (a) 38N span
opening from different datasets, (b) comparison of
span opening in 38N, 38S and 37N. (c) Horizontal
ΔX, (d) vertical ΔY and (e) transverse ΔZ pier
movements are also shown. A schematic (f) illustrates
the plan view of observed response of pier tops at a
specific instant.

550
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

37 and 38 were negligibly small (not shown), indicating that these ΔX instances. This 70% magnitude difference between vertical crown dis-
movements are primarily due to rigid body rotations (e.g. rotations in placements is noteworthy, since a similar magnitude of span opening
the XY and XZ planes) of the pier. Fig. 7d describes the vertical and closing (0.7 mm) is experienced by the piers at these instances. This
movement ΔY at 38N pier tops for DS1, where the highlighted instances indicates that different arch mechanisms occur to accommodate
are again shown with circular markers. These movements indicate opening and closing of the span. This statement is further explored in
different characteristic traces. Here, the movements are negative, which Fig. 8b, which compares the crown strain response recorded between
indicates that the arch is sinking into the ground during the passage of the clamps located at A4-A5 and the relative vertical displacement
the train. Fig. 7e describes the accompanying transverse movements ΔZ between the crown and western springing. Positive and negative strains
of pier top targets WP and EP, showing that at 38N, the western and indicate tension and compression, and appear during span opening and
eastern piers experience similar noteworthy transverse movements closing, respectively. The characteristic time history response of the two
which have a characteristic time history that is similar to the span signals in Fig. 8b are remarkably similar; just as in the vertical dis-
opening and closing. At the instant, τ = 3.5, a transverse movement of placement data, the magnitude of crown tensile strains experienced at
approximately 0.2 mm is observed in the positive Z direction (see the τ = 3.5 is 70% larger than the crown compressive strain experienced at
inset illustration and Fig. 5b for the sign conventions). Conversely, at τ = 4.5. However, the crown deflections and strains do not always
the instance, τ = 4.5, a negative transverse movement occurs in Arch follow the same trend as span opening and closing. At the instant
38N, indicating that the pier rotates towards the relieving arch by a τ = 5.35 the western pier does not move in the X direction, and the span
similar amount. The damage due to residual transverse rotation of opening at the springing level reduces to 0.35 mm, which is 50% of the
bricks (in the YZ plane) in the pier between 37N and 38N was high- span opening of 0.7 mm at τ = 3.5. However, the crown strains and
lighted earlier in Fig. 3, and the structural interventions (e.g. concrete vertical deflections in the instant τ = 5.35 are approximately 80% to
filling and ties) which were done to minimise this rotation were noted. those at τ = 3.5. This indicates that a different mechanism also takes
The presented results indicate that the 38N pier tops are still rotating in place when the span opening is caused only by one of the piers. These
the transverse (YZ) plane in small amounts. The transverse movements mechanisms are examined further with strain and deflection data in the
of 38S WP are also shown in Fig. 7e, and these are negligible in com- following paragraph.
parison to the data from the northern portion of the arch during the Fig. 9 shows the longitudinal response from the monitoring plane
passage of an eastbound train. 38N. Fig. 9a-b show the ΔY and ΔX movements in the western section
These transverse and longitudinal movements of the piers are of the arch barrel. The plots feature data from the monitoring targets at
summarised in a schematic plan view in Fig. 7f. This view shows the the western springing A1, western quarter span A3 and crown A5. As
structural response at the instant τ = 3.5 with a load in the northern expected, ΔY movements increase towards the crown while ΔX move-
tracks. In this schematic, each pier is represented as two macro blocks, ments are the highest at the springing and smallest at the crown. These
separated above the relieving arch. Cracking in this area allows the movements could be caused by a combination elastic deformations and
northern part of pier to rotate more than the southern part in the XZ rigid body rotations of sections of the arch. In a rigidly rotating body,
plane, leading to larger span opening on northern side of the relieving rotations calculated from displacements in different parts of the struc-
arch. In this representation, due to existing damage in the northern ture would be expected to be identical. To investigate the extent to
spandrel wall (see Fig. 3), the spandrel wall does not restrict pier ro- which rigid body rotations can explain the measured response, the XY
tations. Further measurements using DIC (not shown) support this as- plane rotation β between the monitoring points was calculated. Fig. 9c-f
sumption. The influence of these three-dimensional pier movements on shows the calculated rotations (schematically shown with inset figures
the arch response will be examined next. with the positive counter-clockwise sign convention) for DS1. In Fig. 9c,
the XY plane rotations in the monitoring plane 38N, for sections just
below and above transverse crack, denoted by βA1-A2 and βA3-A4, are
5. Arch response mechanisms
shown. Both rotation traces are negative, but the magnitude of βA3-A4 is
significantly larger than that of βA1-A2 at τ = 3.5. This implies that these
This section investigates the arch barrel response mechanisms ac-
sections rotate in the same direction but not as a rigid body. In contrast,
companying the pier movements. To do this, Fig. 8a shows the span
when the span is closing at τ = 4.5, βA1-A2 and βA3-A4 are similar in
opening/closing and the vertical crown displacements at A5 from DS1.
magnitude and direction, indicating rigid body rotation. The additional
According to this trace, the crown displaces 1.3 mm downwards at
rotation in βA3-A4 results in higher vertical displacements of the crown
τ = 3.5, while moving up only about 0.55 mm at τ = 4.5. Vertical crown
during span opening, highlighting the different arch response me-
displacements relative to the western springing, denoted by ΔY(A1-A5),
chanisms.
are also plotted in Fig. 8a, indicating -1.1 mm and 0.65 mm at the same

Fig. 8. Longitudinal plane time history response from DS1 for the monitoring plane 38N: (a) Span opening at pier-top and vertical crown displacements (absolute and
relative to western springing) and (b) vertical relative displacement and strain at the arch crown.

551
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

Fig. 9. Longitudinal plane time history response from

DS1 for the monitoring plane 38N: (a) Vertical ΔY
and (b) horizontal ΔX movements at the western
springing, quarter span and crown. (c–f) The in-plane
(XY plane) rotations calculated from these displace-
ments are shown and are used to compare in-plane
rotations at different sections of the piers and arches
of 37N and 38N.

Another important aspect of response can also be seen by noting the βA3-A4 in Fig. 9c. It is noteworthy that this maximum strain value is an
rotations at the instant τ = 5.35 in Fig. 9c. At this instant, the magnitude order of magnitude larger than all other strains in 38N and clearly in-
of βA1-A2 is close to zero as the pier between Arches 37 and 38 does not dicates the closing of an open crack (see Fig. 3 for a photo of this crack).
move in the X direction, holding the arch and backing in place. How- This area never experiences tensile strains. At the symmetric location
ever, at this time, significant rotations are observed for βA3-A4. This on the east side of the arch, the segment A7-A8 experiences compressive
rotation is enabled by the open transverse crack between monitoring strains smaller than 60 με at any one time, as there is no open crack
targets A2 and A3 (see Fig. 3). The closing of this transverse crack due present in this region. This is consistent with the rotation data in
to dynamic loading contributes to the differential rotation between the Fig. 9e. The crown segments A3-A4, A4-A5 and A5-A6 are the long-
aforementioned sections. This observation will be further supported itudinal segments which experience tensile strains during span opening.
with strain data later. In addition, Fig. 9d shows the calculated rotations For these locations, the strain magnitude peaks at approximately 50 με
on either side of the pier shared by Arches 37 and 38. These rotations at around τ = 3.5. The other crown sensor between A6-A7 experiences
are βA1-A2 from the monitoring plane 38N and βA8-A9 rom the mon- lesser tensile strains, and appears to be shifted. From this data, it is clear
itoring plane 37N. These rotations are remarkably similar, indicating that the longitudinal plane tensile strains which emerge during span
that the portions of both arches near their springing rotate together opening are more distributed, with little indication of strain localisa-
with the backing, in the opposite direction to the rotation of the pier, tion. In addition, a slight asymmetry of the response due to the presence
approximated as a rigid body rotation, denoted by βWP. The corre- of the transverse crack on the western part of the span can also be noted
sponding data was examined for the eastern side of the arch for the since the tensile strain concentrates more towards the west of the
same monitoring plane 38N. The ΔY and ΔX displacements along the crown.
eastern side of the arch (not shown) demonstrated similar trends as the In the previous paragraphs, the arch barrel data from under the
western side. However, the XY plane rotation data shows an interesting loaded northern tracks have been investigated. For the same train
difference. In Fig. 9e, βA6-A7 and βA8-A9 indicate similar magnitudes of loading, it is necessary to investigate the arch longitudinal response in
rotation, with less obvious distinction between positive and negative the south. Fig. 11 shows the key longitudinal response time histories
rotations compared to the western side. This could be explained by the from the monitoring plane 38S and compares them to the equivalent
lack of an open transverse crack on the eastern side of the arch. quantities in 38N. DS3 is used for this purpose. In Fig. 11a, the span
The observations from the rotation data are supported further by the opening data for 38S and 38N demonstrate the same characteristic
strain data of DS1 for Arch 38 in Fig. 10. The top row shows data from trace, although the span opening magnitude in the south is one-half of
the western portion of 38N, while the bottom row shows data from the the magnitude in the north. A more drastic reduction is observed for the
eastern portion. It is critical to note that the highest magnitude strains vertical crown displacements; displacements in 38N are three to four
are observed between locations A2-A3. In particular, a maximum strain times higher than the displacements in 38S (Fig. 11b). A similar level of
of 220 με is observed just after τ = 5.35. This corresponds to the con- decrease from 38N to 38S is observed for the strains and in-plane ro-
siderable differential rotation that was observed between βA1-A2 and tations in Fig. 11c and d. This demonstrates the effective concentration

552
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

(a)

Fig. 10. Longitudinal plane strain time history response from DS1 for 38N: Data from the (a) western and (b) eastern fibre optic segments.

Fig. 11. Longitudinal plane time history response from DS3 for the monitoring planes 38S and 38N: (Top left) Span opening at pier-top, (top right) vertical
displacements at the crown, (bottom left) strain in the lower quarter-span region and (bottom right) in-plane rotation between springing and quarter span.

553
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

Fig. 12. (a) Dimensions for a simple rigid body model with highlighted hinges proposed to approximate behaviour and (b–d) a schematic representation of the model
response to axle loading in different locations.

of response in the northern and more damaged half of the arch. indicate that the span closing mechanism involves rotation of half of the
On the basis of these findings, Fig. 12 proposes a simple model to arch as a whole unit. Finally, at τ = 5.35 the span opening is due to the
summarise the fundamental aspects of the longitudinal response. On ΔX movement of the eastern pier. Since the skewback hinge on the
top left of this figure, the proposed hinge locations and distances be- western side of the pier is not activated for this particular case, almost
tween these hinges are shown. Then, for each of the highlighted in- all the rotation occurs around the western intrados hinge point located
stances in Fig. 6, the behaviour is illustrated with the simple model. at approximately the backing height. The data captures the localisation
Note that the “hinges” are only representative of where strain tends to of strains and rotations about this hinge point. In short, Fig. 12 de-
concentrate and how the bridge tends to deform, but are not meant to monstrates the longitudinal response mechanisms, for different sce-
suggest that only rigid body rotations take place, or that elastic de- narios. Similar mechanisms are observed on all sections of Arches 37
formations are insignificant. At τ = 3.5, where the axle is above the and 38, although the magnitude of span opening, and the concentration
crown, the piers are pushed outwards due to increased thrust in X di- of strain and rotations due to cracks, varies. The hinge locations in-
rection, which causes pier rotation in the XY plane about pier founda- dicated in these models represent areas where future degradation may
tions. The foundation hinges depicted in the figure are representative of be expected. There are other areas of potential damage, which stem
a rotation point or region somewhere at or beneath the ground surface from the transverse response mechanisms which are discussed next.
level; a distinct hinge could not be identified. To accommodate the span To determine the transverse arch response mechanisms, displace-
movement, four intrados hinges form. Two of these are located just ment and strain data from DS1 and DS2 will be primarily utilised.
under the skewback stones, where crack opening does seem to con- Fig. 13a compares the transverse (Z-direction) movements at the crown
centrate in distinct joints, and allows the backing to rotate together of the arch with transverse movement at the western pier top for 38N
with two arches on its sides. In addition, two intrados hinges form just and 38S. Here, it can be observed that the crown transverse movements
above the backing area. Here, significant rotation towards the bridge in both 38N and 38S are significantly smaller than the pier transverse
centreline was observed for the western intrados hinge (see Fig. 9c), so movements and can be neglected. These measurements hint at a rota-
this “hinge” is actually manifest in closing of the intrados crack at this tion mechanism in the XZ plane, where the arch barrel moves away
location. The symmetric eastern intrados hinge is not discrete but is from the bridge centreline at the springing. This indicates that at
representative of the increase of compressive strain in this region. This τ = 3.5, the existing longitudinal crack above the relieving arch at the
likely involves significant bending deformation, and involves relatively springing level opens due to the northward movement of the western
small local rotations (see Fig. 9e). Together, the two intrados hinges springing. The observation of cracking in this area was discussed earlier
cause the crown to depress significantly and experience tensile strains and shown in Fig. 3 and will be further examined with strain data.
on the intrados. In reality, these tensile strains at the crown are dis- Fig. 13b shows the first three strain measurements from the mon-
tributed and do not concentrate around an extrados hinge (see Fig. 10). itoring plane 38W, which are placed in the northern half of the struc-
At τ = 4.5, the data indicated a different mechanism with smaller ture. All of these measurements show tensile transverse bending strain
displacements. This mechanism is a simple span closing mechanism, that is induced when the axles are on the investigated span (e.g. at
with hinges under the skewbacks and an intrados hinge at the arch τ = 3.5 and τ = 5.35). At τ = 4.5, there is no axle above Arch 38, and
crown. Again, the skewback hinges are discrete, while the crown hinge minor compressive strains are observed. The measurement ε (T2-T3) is
is representative of distributed compressive strain at the arch intrados. taken directly under the tracks and experiences the highest strains. In
The consistent rotations of segments of the arch (see Fig. 9c and e) Fig. 13c, the three transverse measurements from the southern section

554
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

Fig. 13. Time history response from DS1 and DS2 to

describe the transverse behaviour of the arch: (a) A
comparison of pier top and arch crown transverse ΔZ
pier displacements, strain data from (b) northern and
(c) southern fibre optic segments of transverse mon-
itoring plane 38W. A plan view schematic (d) illus-
trates the observed transverse response of arches at
τ = 3.5.

of 38W are shown. As expected, the measurements ε (T5-T6) and Class 185 train was examined, is useful. According to Fig. 14a, the
ε (T6-T7) show negative compressive strains, indicative of a hogging maximum span opening experienced at 38S in the instance τ = 3.5 is
moment. This behaviour is typical of 3D arch membrane behaviour and only 0.45 mm, as opposed to the movement of 0.7 mm experienced by
has been discussed in numerous works in the literature [26,27]. How- 38N when the train was on the other track (Fig. 11). However, the span
ever, the ε (T4-T5) signal is unusual, displaying less well-defined peaks opening experienced at 38N in the instance τ = 3.5 is 0.25 mm, which is
and indicating tensile strain at τ = 4.5. The unusual behaviour of this similar to the movement of 0.3 mm experienced by 38S in Fig. 14. The
section is likely to be due to its location over a hairline longitudinal vertical displacement traces in Fig. 14b for the crown indicate a similar
crack. As opposed to other sections which measure the bending strains, phenomenon. A maximum vertical displacement of 0.75 mm is experi-
this section measures the opening and closing of the crack as well. enced at this location in 38S. However, when the train is on the
Fig. 13d summarises the indicated transverse response mechanism northern tracks 38N experiences 1.3 mm of vertical deflection. Fig. 14c
of the arches at the instance τ = 3.5 with a schematic plan view shows the axial strains between A2-A3, just above the backing, for 38S.
drawing. In this drawing, the response of the arches is sketched over High levels of strain are observed in 38S, though the maximum value
deformed piers, which were previously shown in Fig. 7. This schematic reduced to 100 με compared to the maximum of 200 με observed in
illustrates the transverse movement of components by dividing the ar- Fig. 11c for 38N. Finally, Fig. 14d shows the rotation of the western
ches and piers into macro blocks. The northwest macro block of Arch 38 springing βA1-A2 for 38S and 38N. The rotation behaviour for the
transmits the vertical loads from a train axle in the midspan of Arch 38 westbound train is qualitatively similar to the rotation behaviour ob-
through a concentrated area near the relieving arch. This concentration served for the eastbound train in Fig. 11d, and the relative difference
allows loss of contact at the exterior edge, allowing the skewback to between 38N and 38S in Fig. 14d is again smaller than that shown in
rotate in the XZ plane as it is supported primarily on its interior edge. Fig. 11d. These results consistently indicate that relative movements
The northwest macro block of Arch 38 also rotates in the XZ plane to between the north and the south sections are not proportional. Local
allow the springing of the northwest macro block to move northwards aspects, such as the distribution of damage in the arch and the pier or
(positive Z direction). This behaviour causes the longitudinal crack the soil conditions underneath the structure, cause this dissimilar re-
above the relieving arch to open. In the schematic, the concentration of sponse, and concentrate the response in the northern part of the arch.
movements in the northern part of these arches and their observed As mentioned earlier, data was gathered during two site visits.
interaction are highlighted. During the first site visit in January 2016, FBG data was gathered from
Arch 37. The sensors were left in place for six months, and data was
collected again from Arch 37 during the second visit in July 2016.
6. Pier & arch response to different loads Fig. 15 shows that the span opening, crown strain, quarter span strain
and transverse strain over the longitudinal crack are very similar in
This section investigates the salient aspects of the pier and arch both datasets. Although a temperature difference of around 15 degrees
response to different loads. Within this context, the span opening and existed between the two dates, dynamic strain measurements varied a
closing of the piers, the vertical deflections and strains at the crown, maximum of 15 με . This level of strain difference is not dissimilar to the
strains over the transverse and longitudinal crack and the XY plane small strain differences observed due to the live loads in trains [25].
rotation at the springing are examined. This indicates that the response varied little during this time, without
Fig. 14 shows the longitudinal response of the monitoring planes any significant change in behaviour.
38S and 38N to a westbound train (DS9) which travels on the southern Fig. 16 describes the response of monitoring plane 38N to an east-
tracks above 38S. Comparing the results from this figure to Fig. 11, bound Class 155 train and contrasts it to the response to a Class 185
where the longitudinal response of the same planes to the eastbound

555
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

Fig. 14. Time history response from DS9 for the

monitoring planes 38S and 38N: (Top left) Span
opening at pier-top, (top right) vertical displacements
at the crown, (bottom left) strain in the lower
quarter-span region and (bottom right) in-plane ro-
tation between springing and quarter span. As op-
posed to previous datasets, the train travels on the
southern track in the opposite (west) direction for
this dataset.

train. Fig. 6 described the characteristics of these vehicles, highlighting therefore the characteristic response trace to these two vehicles are very
that the dimensions of each car Class 155 and 185 trains are very si- similar. However, due its lower weight Class 155 causes smaller span
milar. However, the investigated Class 155 train is composed of two opening (0.5 mm versus 0.7 mm at τ = 3.5), crown vertical displace-
cars instead of three, and is 40% lighter. The response signature de- ments (1mm versus 1.3 mm at τ = 3.5), strains and rotations (see
scribed by Fig. 16 is largely governed by the axle positions and Fig. 16c and d). As opposed to Class 155 and 185 trains, Class 144 trains

Fig. 15. Time history responses from DS1 and DS11 for the monitoring plane 37N: (a) Span opening at pier-top, (b) strain at the crown region, (c) strain in the lower
quarter-span region and (d) transverse strain over the longitudinal crack on the eastern portion of the arch. DS1 and DS11 were recorded six months apart.

556
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

Fig. 16. Time history response from DS1 and DS12

for the monitoring plane 38N: (a) Span opening at
pier-top, (b) vertical displacements at the crown, (c)
strain in the lower quarter-span region and (c) in-
plane arch rotation above the springing. DS1 records
response to a three car Class 185 train, while the
DS12 examines the response to a two car Class 155
train.

Fig. 17. Time history response from DS1 and DS13

for the monitoring plane 38N: (a) Span opening at
pier-top, (b) vertical displacements at the crown, (c)
strain in the lower quarter-span region and (d) in-
plane arch rotation above the springing. DS 1 records
response to a three car Class 185 train, while the
DS12 examines the response to a four car Class 144
train.

have a shorter wheelbase, which approximately equals to the span. both instances. This suggests that the section of the arch above the
Therefore at each of the instances τ = 3.5,4.5,5.35 shown in Fig. 6, there backing is deforming in flexure, to allow these movements. A similar
would be an axle above the crown of Arch 38. Fig. 17a shows the span behaviour was noted earlier for Class 185 train at τ = 5.35 in Fig. 12d.
opening response pattern for a Class 144 train. The characteristic trace Fig. 17c and d present evidence of this rotation behaviour in the arch.
of Class 185 and 155 trains is replaced by higher frequency cycles, The strain above the backing area, ε (A2-A3) remains consistently high,
where the span opening is prominent and span closing is reduced. It is and is close to its maximum value in the instances τ = 4.5,5.35 where
also interesting that the highest span opening is observed at the in- the arch is flexing. The strains experienced in this location are an order
stance τ = 3.5 where the leading carriage axles are placed above the of magnitude higher than strains experienced elsewhere. The maximum
crowns of Arches 37 and 38. In contrast, at the instances τ = 4.5,5.35, strain of 130 με is less than Class 185 train response strain of 200 με .
the span opening is close to zero, as the axles above spans 37, 38 and 39 However, this represents a noteworthy increase in strain concentration
limit pier movements. when it is noted that the weight of the Class 144 bogie is 40% of the
Fig. 17b demonstrates that the crown vertical displacements are weight of the Class 185 bogie. In addition, the rotation trace in Fig. 17d
predominantly negative for Class 144 trains. This is due to the narrow reinforces these observations. The rotations experienced at the in-
wheelbase of Class 144 trains which prevent pure closing of unloaded stances τ = 4.5,5.35 are small, as the pier cannot rotate. This causes
spans. Furthermore, despite negligible span opening at the instances significant rotations to accumulate in the arch itself.
τ = 4.5,5.35, vertical displacements close to 0.5 mm are experienced at

557
S. Acikgoz et al. Engineering Structures 168 (2018) 544–558

7. Discussion and conclusions Aldaikh, and Gilly Donaldson for their help in data collection. In ad-
dition, the authors are grateful to Mark Norman of Network Rail for his
This paper presented an investigation of the dynamic behaviour of a support.
brick masonry viaduct with innovative FBG and DIC sensing techni-
ques. The quasi-distributed nature of data allowed extensive measure- References
ments of displacements, rotations and strains at many different parts of
the bridge. Such extensive measurements provided unique data which [1] Eurostat. Energy, transport and environment indicators. Luxembourg: Publications
enabled new insight into the behaviour. Primarily, the measurements Office of the European Union; 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.2785/138586.
[2] Network Rail. Network RUS: Passenger Rolling Stock; 2011.
were used to determine the longitudinal and transverse response me- [3] Orban Z. Assessment, reliability and maintenance of masonry. In: Roca P, Molins C,
chanisms of different components of the viaduct. Correlations and editors. Arch Bridg. IV-Advances Assessment, Struct. Des. Constr., Barcelona; 2004.
distinctions between different measurements were used to propose p. 152–61.
[4] Sarhosis V, De Santis S, de Felice G. A review of experimental investigations and
critical mechanisms, which were utilised to evaluate and interpret vi- assessment methods for masonry arch bridges. Struct Infrastruct Eng
sually observed damage. The data highlighted the following novel as- 2016;12:1439–64.
pects concerning dynamic viaduct behaviour: [5] Harvey WJ, Smith FW. The behaviour and assessment of multispan arches. Struct
Eng 1991;69:411–7.

• The arch behaviour was three-dimensional, particularly due to the

[6] Gilbert M, Melbourne C. Rigid-block analysis of masonry structures. Struct Eng
1994;72:356–61.
relieving arches in the piers. Transverse response, just like long- [7] Harvey B. Stiffness and damage in masonry bridges. Proc ICE – Bridg Eng
2012;165:127–34.
itudinal response mechanisms, can be important to measure.
•
[8] Melbourne C, Gilbert M. The behaviour of multiring brickwork arch bridges. Struct
Rigid body pier rotations, likely influenced by the soil-structure Eng 1995;73:39–47.
interaction effects, plays a critical role. Span opening induced large [9] Fanning PJ, Boothby TE, Roberts BJ. Longitudinal and transverse effects in masonry
vertical displacements in the arch barrel, while pier torsion inter- arch assessment. Constr Build Mater 2001;15:51–60.
[10] McKibbins LD, Melbourne C, Sawar N, Gaillard CS. CIRIA C656: Masonry arch
acted with transverse movements and longitudinal cracking in the bridges: condition appraisal and remedial treatment. London; 2006.
arch and piers. [11] Orbán Z, Gutermann M. Assessment of masonry arch railway bridges using non-

• As well as the rigid body rotation of the backing and lower parts of destructive in-situ testing methods. Eng Struct 2009;31:2287–98.
[12] Forde MC. International practice using NDE for the inspection of concrete and
the arch, flexing of the arch above its backing was observed. In masonry arch bridges. Bridg Struct 2010;6:25–34.
particular, trains with a wide wheelbase caused large span opening [13] Conde B, Drosopoulos GA, Stavroulakis GE, Riveiro B, Stavroulaki ME. Inverse
and predominant rigid body rotation of the arches with their analysis of masonry arch bridges for damaged condition investigation: application
on Kakodiki bridge. Eng Struct 2016;127:388–401.
backing. Trains with a narrow wheelbase primarily caused bending [14] Acikgoz S, Soga K, Woodhams J. Evaluation of the response of a vaulted masonry
within the arch; this type of loading caused only small span opening structure to differential settlements using point cloud data and limit analyses.
and rotation at backing level. Constr Build Mater 2017;150:916–31.

• The response of the arch was strongly affected by existing damage. [15] Ye C, Riley E, Pendrigh S, Acikgoz S, DeJong M. Detection of masonry arch bridge
historic deformations using point cloud data; 2017.
The transverse cracks resulted in a strong localisation of strains, and [16] Kishen JMC, Ramaswamy A, Manohar CS. Safety assessment of a masonry arch
a modification of the longitudinal response mechanisms. bridge: field testing and simulations. J Bridg Eng 2013;18:162–71.
[17] Brookes C. Pop bottle bridge supplementary load test. Southampton, UK; 2004.
[18] Domede N, Sellier A, Stablon T. Structural analysis of a multi-span railway masonry
These results have important implications for improving the existing bridge combining in situ observations, laboratory tests and damage modelling. Eng
assessment techniques for masonry viaducts. Struct 2013;56:837–49.
[19] Fanning P, Boothby T. Three-dimensional modelling and full-scale testing of stone

• It remains a formidable task to identify existing damage, to under-

arch bridges. Comput Struct 2001;79:2645–62.
[20] Brencich A, Sabia D. Experimental identification of a multi-span masonry bridge:
stand its progression and its influence on the global behaviour of the the Tanaro Bridge. Constr Build Mater 2008;22:2087–99.
structure. Quasi-distributed sensing techniques demonstrated in this [21] Acikgoz S, Pelecanos L, Giardina G, Aitken J, Soga K. Distributed sensing of a
masonry vault during nearby piling. Struct Control Heal Monit 2016;24.
paper provide important detail for this purpose and can provide [22] Hoole K. A Regional History of the Railways of Great Britain, Volume 4: The North
valuable input for serviceability assessments and design of East. Newton Abbot, David and Charles; 1973.
strengthening schemes. [23] Harvey B, Harvey H. On the service behaviour of masonry viaducts. Proc ICE –

• The train wheelbase was shown to influence the governing modes of

Bridg Eng 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/jbren.15.00031.
[24] Majumder M, Gangopadhyay TK, Chakraborty AK, Dasgupta K, Bhattacharya DK.
viaduct. Commonly used load models such as the Type RA1 loading Fibre Bragg gratings in structural health monitoring-present status and applications.
[28] do not consider the wheelbase as an important factor, but Sens Actuators, A Phys 2008;147:150–64.
[25] Acikgoz S, DeJong MJ, Soga K. Sensing dynamic displacements in masonry rail
should do so.
bridges using 2D digital image correlation; 2017.
[26] Chettoe CS, Henderson W. Masonry arch bridges: a study. Proc Inst Civ Eng
Acknowledgements 1957;7:723–74.
[27] Davey N. Tests on Road Bridges, National Building Studies Research Paper No. 16.
London, UK; 1953.
The work carried out was funded by EPSRC and Innovate UK, [28] Network Rail. NR/GN/CIV/025: The structural assessment of underbridges.
through the Cambridge Centre for Smart Infrastructure and London; 2006.
Construction (Grant Reference Number EP/L010917/1). The research [29] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_185.
[30] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_155.
materials supporting this publication can be accessed at https://doi. [31] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_144.
org/10.17863/CAM.22572. The authors would like to thank Jason
Shardelow, Peter Knott, Giuseppe Narciso, Melanie Banes, Hesham

558