Widener University - ASTM International · Senior Project Team 10 – Final Report 13 Figure 2...

Widener University

School of Engineering

Structural Monitoring of a SEPTA Low-Clearance Railway Bridge

May 1, 2017

Senior Project Team # 10

Team Members

Paige Taylor, Mechanical Engineering, Team Leader

Patrick Barcalow, Civil Engineering

Jillian Baxter, Civil Engineering

Emily Morrison, Civil Engineering

Jonathan Olson, Civil Engineering

Tulsi Patel, Biomedical Engineering & Computer Science

Morrell Wolf, Civil Engineering

Faculty Advisor(s) Dr. Sohail Sheikh

Dr. Xiaochao Tang

Industry Advisors William Bisirri, SEPTA

Senior Projects Coordinators

Prof. Xiaomu Song

Prof. Art Kalemkarian

Senior Project Team 10 – Final Report 2

Directory

Senior Project AY 2016-2017

Team No: 10 Date Submitted: 05-01-2017

Project Title: Structural Monitoring of a SEPTA Low-Clearance Railway Bridge

Team Leader:

Name: Paige Taylor Major: Mechanical Engineering____

Email: [email protected] Cell: (267) 315-8699_____________

Team Members (for each):

Name: Emily Morrison Major: Civil Engineering__________

Email: [email protected]__ Cell: (609) 417-0133_____________

Name: Morrell Wolf Major: Civil Engineering__________

Email: [email protected]____ Cell: (856) 520-3862_____________

Name: Jillian Baxter Major: Civil Engineering__________

Email: [email protected] Cell: (609) 352-2449______ _

Name: Patrick Barcalow Major: Civil Engineering__________


Name: Jonathan Olson Major: Civil Engineering__________


Name: Tulsi Patel Major: Biomedical Engineering &__

Computer Science________

Email: [email protected] Cell: (484) 347-3777____________

Faculty Advisor(s):

Name: Dr. Xiaochao Tang ____________ Major: Civil Engineering__ _____

Name: Dr. Sohail Sheikh_____________ Major: Electrical Engineering______

Industry Advisor:

Name: William Bisirri Major: Civil Engineering__________



Business Name: SEPTA, Bridges and Building Department______________________

Business Address: 1234 Market Street, 13th Floor

Philadelphia, PA 19107 ____________


Table of Contents

List of Tables ................................................................................................................. 75

List of Figures ................................................................................................................ 86

Disclaimer ..................................................................................................................... 97

Executive Summary .................................................................................................... 108

Introduction ................................................................................................................. 119

Development of Sensor Unit ..................................................................................... 1210

Sensor Unit Design ................................................................................................ 1210

Sensor Unit Prototype Development ...................................................................... 1513

Sensor Unit Laboratory Results ............................................................................. 1715

Investigation of Power Supply Alternatives ............................................................ 1916

Results of Power Supply ........................................................................................ 1917

Development of Finite Element Model....................................................................... 2017

Design of Finite Element Model ............................................................................. 2017

Modeling Steps of Finite Element Model ............................................................... 2421

Results of Finite Element Analysis......................................................................... 2522

Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 3633

Recommendations .................................................................................................... 3633

References ................................................................................................................ 3835

Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................... 3936

Appendix A: Project Charter ...................................................................................... 4037

Appendix B: Schedule ............................................................................................... 4138

Appendix C: Budget .................................................................................................. 4239

Appendix D: Impact Loading ..................................................................................... 4340

Appendix E: Static Load and Impact Load Results ................................................... 4542

Appendix F: Architecture of Wireless Sensor Unit ..................................................... 5653

List of Tables .....................................................................................................................

List of Figures ....................................................................................................................

Disclaimer .........................................................................................................................

Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................


Introduction .......................................................................................................................

Development of Sensor Unit .............................................................................................

Sensor Unit Design ........................................................................................................

Sensor Unit Prototype Development ..............................................................................

Sensor Unit Laboratory Results .....................................................................................

Investigation of Power Supply Alternatives ....................................................................

Results of Power Supply ................................................................................................

Development of Finite Element Model...............................................................................

Design of Finite Element Model .....................................................................................

Modeling Steps of Finite Element Model .......................................................................

Results of Finite Element Analysis.................................................................................

Conclusions .......................................................................................................................

Recommendations ............................................................................................................

References ........................................................................................................................

Acknowledgments .............................................................................................................

Appendix A: Project Charter ..............................................................................................

Appendix B: Schedule .......................................................................................................

Appendix C: Budget ..........................................................................................................

Appendix D: Impact Loading .............................................................................................

Appendix E: Static Load and Impact Load Results ...........................................................

Appendix F: Architecture of Wireless Sensor Unit .............................................................

Appendix G: Coding for Sensor Units................................................................................

List of Tables ................................................................................................................... 5

List of Figures .................................................................................................................. 6

Disclaimer ....................................................................................................................... 7

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 8

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 9

Development of Sensor Unit ......................................................................................... 10

Sensor Unit Design .................................................................................................... 10

Sensor Unit Prototype Development .......................................................................... 13

Sensor Unit Laboratory Results ................................................................................. 15

Investigation of Power Supply Alternatives ................................................................ 16


Results of Power Supply ............................................................................................ 17

Development of Finite Element Model........................................................................... 17

Design of Finite Element Model ................................................................................. 17

Modeling Steps of Finite Element Model ................................................................... 21

Results of Finite Element Analysis............................................................................. 22

Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 33

Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 33

References .................................................................................................................... 35

Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................... 36

Appendix A: Project Charter .......................................................................................... 37

Appendix B: Schedule ................................................................................................... 38

Appendix C: Budget ...................................................................................................... 39

Appendix D: Impact Loading ......................................................................................... 40

Appendix E: Static Load and Impact Load Results ....................................................... 42

Appendix F: Architecture of Wireless Sensor Unit ......................................................... 53

Appendix G: Coding for Sensor Units............................................................................ 54


List of Tables

Table 1 Final Bridge Components ............................................................................. 2320

Table 2 Silverliner V Characteristics.......................................................................... 2725


List of Figures

Figure 1 Microcontroller (Particle Electron 3G w/ data plan) ..................................... 1210

Figure 2 Analog Devices ADXL377 3-Axis Accelerometer ........................................ 1311

Figure 3 Omega KFH-20-120-C1-11L3M3R strain gauge ......................................... 1311

Figure 4 Texas Instruments INA122 instrument amplifier .......................................... 1311

Figure 5 Adafruit SD Breakout Board ........................................................................ 1412

Figure 6 TL-5930/S, 3.6v, 19Ah, D-Cell battery ........................................................ 1412

Figure 7 SMA to uFL/u.FL/IPX/IPEX RF Adapter Cable............................................ 1513

Figure 8 .4GHz Dipole Swivel Antenna with RP-SMA - 2dBi ..................................... 1513

Figure 9 Wire Connections ........................................................................................ 1614

Figure 10 Creating Customized Printed Circuit Board and Assembled Prototype ..... 1614

Figure 11 3D Printed Case (Inventor Model) ............................................................. 1714

Figure 12 Laboratory Four-Point Bending Setup using Hydraulic Actuator ............... 1715

Figure 13 Sensor unit could capture low strain levels under cyclic loading ............... 1815

Figure 14 Display of real-time sensor data on cloud server ...................................... 1816

Figure 15 Schematic of Power Supply ...................................................................... 1917

Figure 16 Previous Senior Project Model .................................................................. 2018

Figure 17 Isometric View of Final Bridge ................................................................... 2219

Figure 18 Top View of Final Bridge ........................................................................... 2220

Figure 19 I-Beam Model ............................................................................................ 2523

Figure 20 Results of Four Point Bending Test ........................................................... 2623

Figure 21 Graph of Four Point Bending Test ............................................................. 2724

Figure 22 FE Mesh of Bridge Model .......................................................................... 2825

Figure 23 Results from Two Axles ............................................................................ 2926

Figure 24 Results from One Train Car ...................................................................... 2926

Figure 25 Results from a Half Car ............................................................................. 3027

Figure 26 Graph of Deflection of All Load Cases ...................................................... 3128

Figure 27 Results of the Strain on All Load Cases .................................................... 3229

Figure 28 Impulse vs. Time Graph3 ........................................................................... 3330

Figure 29 Results of Truck Impact Pressure ............................................................. 3330

Figure 30 Graph of Deflection of Truck Impact Loading ............................................ 3431

Figure 31 Comparison of Three Components ........................................................... 3532


Disclaimer

This report was generated by Senior Project Team #10, academic year 2016-2017, a

group of engineering students at Widener University. It is primarily a record of a project

conducted by these students as a part of the curriculum requirements for a Bachelor of

Science degree in engineering. Widener University makes no representation that the

material contained in this report is error free or complete in respects. Furthermore, the

University, its faculty, administration, and students make no recommendations for the

use of said material and take no responsibility for such usage. Thus, persons or

organizations that choose to use said material do so at their own risk.


Executive Summary

Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA)’s infrastructure includes

many railway bridges, built decades ago, that have a low clearance height of merely 11

feet. These low-clearance bridges have often led to vehicle collisions over the years.

Currently, the damage due to the collisions is only assessed visually and qualitatively.

The effects of these collisions have not been quantitatively evaluated, therefore

hindering the evaluation of the structural health condition of the bridge. In order to

continuously monitor the bridge in real time, a low-cost wireless sensor unit was

developed to be installed on the bridge. The prototype unit consists of a microcontroller

with a built-in cellular module, a strain gauge, a triaxle accelerometer, and a data

storage module. A custom-designed printed circuit board (PCB) was created to allow a

compact assemblage and communication among the various components. This unit is

capable of recording strain and acceleration of the bridge under impact load and train

moving loads. In addition, a finite element analysis (FEA) software package, ABAQUS

was used to simulate and analyze the bridge model under the possible load conditions,

such as various static train loading and truck impact loading. The sensor units were

tested for their functionality and reliability through laboratory experiments. The

laboratory experiments subject the sensor units to simulated cyclic train moving loads.


Introduction

SEPTA’s bridge infrastructure built in the early 1900’s in accordance with codes and

regulations of the time, which consisted of having a clearance height of eleven feet that

was appropriate at the time. However, model commercial trucks’ heights range from 14

ft to 16 ft and have created issues in regard to collisions with the low clearance bridges.

Signs and other precautionary means have been utilized to alert and warn the freight

drivers about the clearance height, but for various reasons, they continue to collide with

the bridge. Due to the constraints of budget, lowering the under passing roadway or

raising the bridge is not a probable solution and it is expected that vehicle collision with

the bridge will continue, which will result in more damage to the structural integrity of the

bridge.

Currently, there are no effective means to evaluate structural conditions of the bridges

subjected to vehicle collisions. Bridges are inspected visually by SEPTA although truck

impacts may cause internal stresses and strains and possibly structural damage of the

bridge, especially when the bridges are subjected to impact loads repeatedly. Recording

the bridge’s structural responses to the impact load would enable quantitative

evaluation of the long-term structural condition of the bridge and the long-term effects of

truck impact on the bridge.

In order to evaluate and monitor the overall integrity of the bridge, a combination of finite

element analysis and bridge sensors were created. Last year’s senior project group had

created sensor units to monitor strain and acceleration occurring on the bridge. As of

now, the sensors have been modified to have a greater data storage capacity and a

more compact design to be less visual to the public. The use of an alternative power

aside from batteries has also been investigated. Finite element analysis was conducted

to investigate the bridge responses to various static and dynamic impact loads.


Development of Sensor Unit

Sensor Unit Design

The final design consists of the following components:

Microcontroller (Particle Electron 3G w/ data plan)

Analog Devices ADXL377 3-Axis Accelerometer

Omega KFH-20-120-C1-11L3M3R strain gauge

Texas Instruments INA122 instrument amplifier

Adafruit SD Breakout Board

TL-5930/S, 3.6v, 19Ah, D-Cell battery

SMA to uFL/u.FL/IPX/IPEX RF Adapter Cable

2.4GHz Dipole Swivel Antenna with RP-SMA - 2dBi Figure 1 is a FCC, CE and IC certified microcontroller with a real-time operation system

(RTOS). This has an open source design and a platform for cloud computing to

managing connected hardware.

Figure 1 Microcontroller (Particle Electron 3G w/ data plan)

The ADXL377, shown in Figure 2, is a ±200g, 3-Axis accelerometer which outputs a

voltage linear to acceleration in the x, y, and z-planes. 3.3V is required to operate this

unit on a low µA when active. The low power consumption and low cost makes this

accelerometer ideal for funds-limited projects.


Figure 2 Analog Devices ADXL377 3-Axis Accelerometer

An omega KFH-20-120-C1-11L3M3R pre wired linear gages, X-Y planar rosettes (Tee

Rosette), 0°/45°/90° planar rosettes for constantan materials, seen in Figure 3, was

used. Strain measurements were going to be collected from the bridge’s steel

structures.

Figure 3 Omega KFH-20-120-C1-11L3M3R strain gauge

The INA122, shown in Figure 4, was used to amplify the voltage signal from the strain

gauge circuit.

Figure 4 Texas Instruments INA122 instrument amplifier


An SD Breakout board, as shown in Figure 5, can be connected to the custom printed

circuit board (PCB) and used as a data storage/logger for the system.

Figure 5 Adafruit SD Breakout Board

The unit will be powered with two TL-5930/S 3.6v 19ah Size D batteries, shown in

Figure 6.

Figure 6 TL-5930/S, 3.6v, 19Ah, D-Cell battery

The SMA to uFL/u.FL/IPX/IPEX RF Adapter Cable was used to replace the original

antenna that comes with the particle electron so the unit could fit into the 3D printed

case. This adapter connects to the 2.4GHz Dipole Swivel Antenna with RP-SMA - 2dBi.

Shown in Figure 7 is the SMA to uFL/u.FL/IPX/IPEX RF Adapter Cable. Shown in

Figure 8 is the 2.4 GHz Dipole Swivel Antennas with RP-SMA - 2dBi.


Figure 7 SMA to uFL/u.FL/IPX/IPEX RF Adapter Cable

Figure 8 .4GHz Dipole Swivel Antenna with RP-SMA - 2dBi

Sensor Unit Prototype Development

Upon successfully creating communication and connections among the various

components on bread boards (Figure 9), a customized Printed Circuit Board (PCB) was

designed for the assemblage of the components. Figure 10 shows the PCB layout

which was designed in EAGLE; the prototype was then assembled together by

soldering the components onto the PCB. Each unit consists of two types of sensors (a

triaxial accelerometer and a strain gauge) that are connected to a microcontroller unit

(MCU) through analog-digital-converter (ADC). Analog measurements from the sensors

are converted into digital data by ADC and communicated to MCU, in which a firmware

program in C++ specifies how the data is saved and stored either on an on-board

memory or transmitted to a cloud server through the cellular module. Using Autodesk


Inventor, a case for the sensor unit was constructed and 3D printed as shown in Figure

11.

Figure 9 Wire Connections

Figure 10 Creating Customized Printed Circuit Board and Assembled Prototype


Figure 11 3D Printed Case (Inventor Model)

Sensor Unit Laboratory Results

The functionality of the prototype was tested in the laboratory using a hydraulic MTS

machine. The sensor unit was subjected to low fatigue cyclic loading. As shown in

Figure 12 the test setup included a 120 ohms strain gauge being firmly attached on the

underside of the steel I beam with the load being applied via the actuator on top. The

strain gage output was collected under varying loads of 3- 5 kips.

Figure 12 Laboratory Four-Point Bending Setup using Hydraulic Actuator

Figure 13 shows the strain collected under 1 Kip cyclic loading over 1.3 second interval.

The results are in unison with the loading profile


Figure 13 Sensor unit could capture low strain levels under cyclic loading

The sensor unit can successfully connect to a data logging and analysis cloud called

ThingSpeak. As shown in Figure 14, this allows for real time monitoring and analysis

using MATLAB toolboxes.

Figure 14 Display of real-time sensor data on cloud server


Investigation of Power Supply Alternatives

From last year’s project, it was determined that the use of batteries, to supply power to

the sensor unit, was not a long-term solution. The team determined that in order to have

a sensor unit that didn’t need to have maintenance done frequently, some kind of

energy harvesting had to be implemented. Research began on which type of energy

harvesting method would work best for the current situation. Solar, wind, and kinetic

energy were the three methods considered. Kinetic Energy was then chosen because of

its ability harness energy from the movement of the bridge whenever a train would pass

over. Research then began on how to implement kinetic energy harvesting onto the

bridge. It was determined that piezoelectric film could possibly generate enough energy.

A piezoelectric film and energy storage device were ordered and a lab experiment was

set up. The products were ordered from Smart Material and the product numbers were

M8514P2 and EH Cl-50. The experiment consisted of the piezoelectric film and storage

device attached to a cantilever beam. An oscilloscope was then hooked up to outputs to

determine the power output of the piezoelectric film.

Results of Power Supply

To determine if the use of piezoelectric film was a viable solution, an experiment was

conducted to determine the power output; see Figure 15 for a schematic. In the

schematic, the MFC is the piezoelectric film, specifically MFC 8514P2, and the energy-

harvesting module is the storage device. The piezoelectric film was attached to a

cantilever beam and connected to the storage device. The oscilloscope was then used

to read the voltage output at both the storage device and the piezoelectric film itself.

Figure 15 Schematic of Power Supply

Once the cantilever was stimulated, a voltage curve appeared for the piezoelectric film.

The peak value was around 1V, but didn't last very long and required a large excitation

to produce. This power is AC power and cannot be used to power the sensor unit, as

DC power is needed. One of the benefits of the storage device is that it converts the

power from AC to DC and stores the energy gathered from the piezoelectric film until

enough can be supplied, which led to the idea of using the piezoelectric film to charge

the sensor unit’s batteries to provide a longer operation life. A reading could not be

obtained from the output of the storage device; this could be from a defective storage


device, or not enough energy was being generated from the piezoelectric film to trigger

the device to release the energy. It was concluded that the piezoelectric film would not

be a reliable way to obtain enough power to substantially prolong the life of the

batteries.

Development of Finite Element Model

Design of Finite Element Model

Finite element analysis was a crucial component to this project for several reasons,

such as: gathering strain and deflection of static train loading, determining the resting

frequency of the bridge, gathering design consideration for impact loading, and ensuring

that the sensors are working properly. Before any of these values could have been

determined, a realistic bridge model had to be created. The previous senior project

group created a bridge model using the modeling software Solidworks, but due to errors

within the model; this model could not be used for accurate analysis. Figure 16 below

shows the previous senior project group model.

Figure 16 Previous Senior Project Model

With these existing errors, the senior project group had to remodel the bridge with less

complexity. The group did not have access to the software Solidworks, however;


AutoCAD had the ability of remodeling the bridge just as effectively as Solidworks.

Using existing drawings of the bridge that were created in the late 1920’s, the group

was able to model the bridge with little to no errors. The bridge was broken down into

fourteen components that were assembled in the finite element analysis program

ABAQUS and drawn in AutoCAD. These fourteen components are listed as followed:

Aggregate Bottom Plate (modified) I-Beam 12x50 - 51.25 inches I-Beam 12x50 - 69.25 inches I-Beam 12x50 - 87.25 inches I-Beam 12x50 - 105.25 inches I-Beam 12x50 - 123.25 inches I-Beam 12x50 - 142.00 inches I-Beam 12x50 - Full length Cross Tie Sleepers Concrete Slab Train Rails Steel Truss Top Plate (modified)

The top and bottom plates were modified and simplified because of the complexity it

created within the finite element analysis software. These pieces acted in the same

manner as the non-modified plates, as previously modeled last year. The non-modified

plates were stacked on top of each other, but the group calculated an equivalent volume

so that plates could be expanded across the entire span of the bridge as one solid

piece. Figure 16 above illustrates what the existing plates looked like before. The

Figures below, 17 & 18, reveals two pictures of the final model bridge, Isometric and

Top view.


Figure 17 Isometric View of Final Bridge

Figure 18 Top View of Final Bridge

Furthermore, the bridge model cannot run successfully without assigning properties to

the components of the bridge, such as Young's Modulus and Poisson ratio. These

values were imported into ABAQUS as material properties for each individual part.

Table 1 below organizes the materials’ properties for each part.


Table 1 Final Bridge Components

Part Material Young’s Modulus (psi) Poisson Ratio

Aggregate Stone 2,900,754 0.25

Bottom Plate A996 Steel 29,000,000 0.30

I-Beam 12x50 - 51.25 inches A996 Steel 29,000,000 0.30






I-Beam 12x50 - Full length A996 Steel 29,000,000 0.30

Cross Tie Sleepers Wood 1,820,000 0.30

Concrete Slab Concrete 3,500,000 0.20

Train Rails A996 Steel 29,000,000 0.30

Steel Truss A996 Steel 29,000,000 0.30

Top Plate A996 Steel 29,000,000 0.30

With all this information, the bridge model was ready to be evaluated for the static train

loading and an impact dynamic load that simulates a box truck collision.


Modeling Steps of Finite Element Model

An essential aspect of the project is the utilization of Finite Element Analysis (FEA),

specifically ABAQUS software. In the initial stages of the project, the team began by

researching the software in order to better understand its functionality and capabilities.

Before the team could address the complexity of the bridge model, it was important that

users create a simpler, more comprehensive model to conduct analysis. With an

increased familiarity of the software, the team was able to create a simple I-beam model

that represented a real beam in the laboratory; the team was using this beam to test the

sensor unit on a smaller scale. A crucial part of this project was ensuring that the sensor

unit was reading realistic results, so the development of a ABAQUS model would do just

that.

Following the creation of the I-beam, the team started to improve the bridge model

developed by the previous year’s group. The old model had some geometric issues and

was modeled as a whole in the form of a single part; for both of these reasons, errors

occurred and it became necessary that the team develops a new bridge model. Utilizing

the old bridge model and the paper drawings as reference, each of the bridge’s

components were modeled in AutoCAD as 3D geometric shapes; note each part was

created separately this time (slabs, beams, girders, etc.). After drawing each part, they

were imported into ABAQUS, one at a time. Within ABAQUS, the parts were assigned

properties individually, and then they were assembled to form the bridge as whole. It is

important to note that the parts were not only assembled by relative location of one

another, but also by surface interaction; the software requires that direct part-to-part

interaction is identified. The final step of the bridge model was adding railway tracks so

that a train loading could be properly simulated. In the same fashion as assembling the

bridge, each part of the railway tracks (rail, sleepers, and subgrade) were modeled in

AutoCAD and imported for assembly. After the proper interactions were assigned, the

model was ready for loading and analysis.

Next, before the team applied the realistic loading conditions, a simpler series of test

loads were applied to ensure the analysis would run without errors. After working out a

few minor geometric errors, the loads were successful and actual simulation loads could

be developed. To address the loading caused by the train, three different scenarios

were simulated in order to determine the worst-case loading scenario. These scenarios

included a single car centered on the bridge, two axles (one from each of two cars) at

the center of the bridge, and finally one axle of a single car centered on the bridge. At

the same time, the team was researching the impact loads created by a truck impacting

the side of the bridge structure. Being that the impact load was much more difficult to


simulate, the research was used to ensure the validity of the loading results. It was

determined that a model of a truck imported to ABAQUS would generate the most

realistic results, but due to modeling errors, a pressure load was substituted and applied

to the apparent point of impact. Although this method may have reduced the validity and

accuracy of the impact load, it produced desirable results that were sufficient in

understanding the affect a truck impact has.

Results of Finite Element Analysis

Finite element analysis was broken down into two segments, which were modeling a

simple I-Beam to compare to the sensors and running various loads onto the bridge

model. The I-beam model was created using ABAQUS. This model was created to

compare results from laboratory 4-point bending test and the results of finite element

analysis. Comparing the results from laboratory testing and the analysis helped verify

the accuracy of strain gage reading from the custom-built sensor unit. Figure 19 shows

the finite element model created for the finite element analysis.

Figure 19 I-Beam Model

The initial finite element model included boundary conditions of a pin and pin connection

to represent the real-life loading and strain conditions on the beam. The loading

conducted in the finite element analysis program was a 3 kip concentrated force unlike

the cyclic loading that was applied in the experiment. Figure 20 represents the

deformation of the beam with a loading of 3 kips using a four-point bending test.


Figure 20 Results of Four Point Bending Test

With the results found from the strain analysis on ABAQUS a graph was created to

represent the strain based on true length of the beam, which is shown in Figure 21.

Furthermore, the maximum strain is 2.06x10^-4 in/in at the middle of the beam.

However, the pin-pin model does portray an accurate representation of the real-life

model in the laboratory because the forces in the real-life model are completely vertical.

Secondly, the bridge is considered a pin-pin connection because the bridge is

prevented from moving side and side and can deform in the downward direction.

Comparing the two values from the sensor unit and the FEA model, it is seen that the

two values are very close. One thing to fix is the loading in the FEA model to accurately

represent the cyclic loading and the max value of loading.


Figure 21 Graph of Four Point Bending Test

Since the completion of the simple I-Beam model, the group then progressed towards

an accurate bridge model for determining the deflection and strain values from static

train loading and impact loading. Research was performed in regards to typical SEPTA

train loading, such as the weight of the train cars, empty or full, the length, number of

axles, etc. It was determined that the Chestnut Hill West Regional Rail uses a SEPTA

Silverliner V car. Each Silverliner V car has an approximate maximum weight of 146,600

pounds, which equates to the maximum weight of a full car occupied by passengers.

The following table, Table 2, indicates the dimensions of a Silverliner V train car. Based

on of these dimensions, on average, two to three cars can rest at the Carpenter Station

platform when picking up and dropping off. In addition, to what type of commuter car

SEPTA uses, research found that at full speed the Silverliner V reaches a maximum

speed of 15 mph with 3 mph/s acceleration and deceleration rates.

Table 2 Silverliner V Characteristics

Total Length of Car 85’-0”

Total Height of Car 12’-6”

Space Between Front and Rear Axles 59’ 6”


Space Between Two Front/Rear Axles 8’-6”

Total Contact Area on Rail 0.50 in2 (Elliptical)

Three different loading scenarios were analyzed, such as two axles at mid-span, one

fully loaded car on the bridge, and a half a car fully loaded on the bridge. These loading

scenarios seem to be the worst case that the group determined after research. The

loads were applied as pressure loads of 36,500 psi over a small area, 0.5 in2, on the

train rails itself instead as concentrated forces because the surface area of the train

wheel is the applying the force. The abutments were not included in the bridge design

because of several reasons, however; the bridge’s boundary conditions mimic the

abutments with a pin connection on the underside of the bridge’s I-beams and steel

trusses. These boundary conditions simulate real life application because the bridge is

prevented from moving side to side, up and down, and forward and back on the

abutments and the pin connections contain the same characteristics. Furthermore, the

ABAQUS bridge model needed to be meshed in order to run successfully. Meshing

creates a set of blocks that make up finite elements for computer analysis. Figure 22

below provides a visual representation of the meshed bridge.

Figure 22 FE Mesh of Bridge Model

As mentioned earlier, three different loading scenarios were evaluated and analyzed.

The first of three was two axles at mid-span on each track. This loading scenario was

applied with two instances of 36,500 pounds of pressure along each track at mid span.

Figure 23 below represents the deflection of the bridge model in a much more dramatic

scale than it would be in reality.


Figure 23 Results from Two Axles

Secondly, the fully loaded car with one axle at mid-span and the other at the end of the

bride was evaluated, again with 36,500 pounds of pressure. Figure 24 below provides a

representation of what the deflection appeared as in a dramatic scale.

Figure 24 Results from One Train Car

Lastly, half a car was loaded onto to the bridge, which contained one axle at mid-span.

This loading scenario was evaluated, and Figure 25 below provides a visualization of

the deflection.


Figure 25 Results from a Half Car

Since these pictures do not provide any numerical values other than the table in the

upper left hand corner for relativity; these images do provide a visualization of where

one can see the most deflection. In all cases, the greatest deflection can be seen in the

center of the bridge, which is logical because that is where most deflection should occur

due to the least support. Data points were gathered along a path in the center truss at

the very bottom to collect values for deflection and they were plotted in relationship to

the bridge span length. Figure 26 below is the graph of the data points along the bottom

of the center truss.


Figure 26 Graph of Deflection of All Load Cases

It is shown that the two axles at mid-span produced the greatest deflection. The value is

approximately 0.17 inches in the downward direction, which occurs at about the mid

span of the bridge. This value makes sense because these train cars carry a large

amount of weight, and 0.17 inches is relatively small for a 73 foot span. Furthermore,

the sensors were never installed on the bridge so the results from finite element

analysis cannot be verified as correct without data and results from the sensors,

however; this provides valuable information for future considerations. These sensors

could be placed towards the center of the bridge because it appears that this is where

most of the data can potentially be produced. Not only does a lot of deflection occur at

mid span, but so does strain. Figure 27 below provides a graph of the strain occurring

across the center truss of the bridge.


Figure 27 Results of the Strain on All Load Cases

The graph above is a strain vs. length graph, and it shows that maximum strain occurs

at the mid span of the bridge. This graph also provides a reinforcement to place the

sensors at the mid span of the bridge because that is where most of the data points will

come from. The strain is a tensile type of strain because the values are positive, and

this makes sense for several of reasons. The bottom of the bridge is concaving like a

smile and the bottom of the bridge is being stretched. Observing the graph, it is noted

that the data points are alternating up a down in a sinusoidal motion. This could be due

to errors within the model that should be resolved in the future. Another issue could be

due to the mesh size, and a finer mesh size might produce more of a smoother line. All

of this data from deflection and strain cannot be verified since the installation of the

sensors was never completed. Other than strain and deflection on the bridge, impact

loads were researched and evaluated.

Truck impact loads were researched and analyzed for design consideration. The first

approach was to model a truck with assigned properties in ABAQUS to simulate it

driving into the bridge, but due to time constraints and formatting errors, the group used

a simpler method. The simpler method consisted of plugging in numbers from an


impulse vs. time graph from previous research and evaluation from outside sources.

Figure 28 below provides the graph from the outside source.

Figure 28 Impulse vs. Time Graph3

This graph provided estimated data points to plug into ABAQUS to run a concentrated

pressure over a portion of time, however; this has the potential to not correspond

correctly with the current bridge model because of several reasons. The main reason is

that this data came from a different bridge and this graph can provide an estimation of

values that might be seen in reality for this bridge. It is difficult to verify without the

sensor data. The bridge model was processed with the values picked from this graph,

which the values can be seen in Appendix D. The bridge model was evaluated and the

deflection vs. bridge span graph and picture can be seen below in Figure 29 and 30.

Figure 29 Results of Truck Impact Pressure


Figure 30 Graph of Deflection of Truck Impact Loading

The graph above represents the results from the impact loads that were created from

the simulated truck collision. The line is data points from the time of collision at its worst

case, which was extracted from the steel truss that the truck collided with. It is shown

that the maximum deflection is about 0.035 inches at about the mid span of the bridge.

0.035 inches seems to be a reasonable value because the load delivered from the truck

is much less than the train loading, assuming the truck was fully loaded and moving at a

maximum speed of 35 mph. The train loading was 36,500 psi and the truck collision has

a maximum pressure of 953 psi. The pressures 36,500 and 953 psi are vastly spread

apart, which will yield much different results, such as different deflections. The

deflection that occurred to the bridge after a truck collision seems low, but the steel

trusses are supported by the I-beams, which create a reinforcement to absorb force. I-

beams are stronger when load is applied to them on end, acting as a column, and in this

case the low deflection is understandable. Again, it is not fully confirmed if the deflection

values are correct because the sensors were never installed and the data supplied by

the reference sources could possibly be inaccurate. Furthermore, a comparison to the

railroad track closest to collision, the collided truss, and the furthest truss from collision

was compared to visualize how the deflections and forces were spread across the

bridge. Figure 31 below compares those components.


Figure 31 Comparison of Three Components

It is apparent that the worse component is the truss that was collided with, but the other

two components experienced their most detrimental deflections in different locations on

the bridge, rather than at the mid span. The rail track experienced almost as much

deflection as the collided truss, whereas the outside truss experienced a much less

deflection. This should be the case because the bridge should absorb most of the

collision, and the furthest component should experience the least deflection, which it

did. This graph provided potential answers it regards to design criteria for future railroad

bridge construction. Lastly, all the data plotted for the graphs, Figures 26, 27, 30, and

31, can be seen in Appendix E.


Conclusions

The strain and acceleration due to impacts on the bridge can be collected from the

sensor units and sent to a cloud server that shows the data in real time. This application

will enable SEPTA to make quick decisions when an incident occurs. The sensor units

and application will be able to provide constant and consistent structural health

surveillance. The sensors units have been improved, such as storing more data,

compacted smaller with less loose wires, and programmed differently. The

improvements that were made to the ABAQUS model provide a more realistic

representation of the stresses and strains that would be seen on the bridge in the field

due to the train and truck loadings. The worst-case scenarios for the various loading

conditions are tested to assure that the bridge can withstand these forces if they were to

be applied to the bridge. The structure’s future condition may be predicted by the use of

the ABAQUS model and sensor unit data.

It is noted that the train loading and truck impact loads are not fully verified because the

sensors were unable to be installed on the bridge. Thus, there was no field data to allow

a comparison with the finite element analysis results. Nevertheless, these results are

still useful because the results can help understand how bridges react to various multi-

dimensional loading conditions. Future research is needed for truck impact loading

because of how crucial it is in regard to the overall structural health of the bridge, and

without proper field data there is no answer to bridge’s conditions.

Recommendations

Challenges were faced in both the electrical component and the finite element analysis

of this project. For any future senior project groups that might be assigned to this

project, a few recommendations have been suggested to help progress the team to a

finalized sensor unit. These recommendations should assist the new group for the

capability of modifying the sensors to improve gauge readings and to modify the finite

element analysis model for several reasons.

Instrumenting the bridge with sensor units and collecting in-situ data; replacing analog

potentiometer with digital potentiometer on sensor unit can improve gauge readings.

Create a more compacted design by using a microSD data logger. In addition, use a

higher capacity SD-card for longer data collection. Improve the casing to be waterproof

to ensure damage will not be caused to the unit when attached to the bridge. Improve


the power supply by using solar panels and rechargeable batteries. Create a website

and app that stores and displaces the sensor readings.

In addition to recommendations for the sensor unit, there are a few recommendations to

further fine tune the finite element model of the bridge. First, it is recommended to

further work on the bridge model using AutoCAD and ABAQUS to ensure the bridge is

created to most accurately represent the bridge. Second, research is recommended to

improve any moving loads such as the truck loading and the train loading. These

moving loads will help better understand what is happening to the bridge when a train is

passing or when a truck is colliding against the bridge. There is a high priority

recommendation to further look into the truck loading as a true truck model, instead of

pressure loads on the bridge, which will hopefully increase the potential of accurate

result readings from ABAQUS.


References

1 “Carpenter Station.” SEPTA. SEPTA, n.d. Web. 2017.

2 “Chestnut Hill West Line Regional Rail Schedule | Weekday | to Center City Philadelphia.” SEPTA. SEPTA, n.d. Web. 2017.

3 El-Tawil, Sherif, Edward Severino, and Priscilla Fonseca. "Vehicle collision with bridge piers." Journal of Bridge Engineering 10.3 (2005): 345-353.

4 “Energy Harvesting from Vibration.” Smart Material Corp. N.p., n.d. 2017.

5 “Poisson’s Ratio.” The Engineering ToolBox. The Engineering ToolBox, n.d. Web. 2017.

6 “Poisson’s Ratio.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 10 April 2017. Web. 2017.

7 “SEPTA Issues New Timeline for Silverliner V Cars.” PlanPhilly. PlanPhilly, n.d. Web. 2017

8 “SEPTA Regional Rail.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 2017.

9 “Silverliner V.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 2017.

10 Xu, Liangjin, et al. "Finite-element and simplified models for collision simulation between overheight trucks and bridge superstructures." Journal of Bridge Engineering 18.11 (2013): 1140-1151.

11 “Young’s Modulus.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 31 March 2017. Web. 2017.


Acknowledgments

The Structural Monitoring of a SEPTA Low-Clearance Railway Senior Project team

would like to thank Dr. Xiaochao Tang and Dr. Sohail Sheikh for their dedication and

time put into being the faculty advisors for this project. In addition, a special thank you

goes to Mr. William Bisirri from SEPTA for coordinating with the team for his time and

patience with working with us on this project. The Senior Project team would also like to

thank Karl Nelson and Jacob Fenstermaker for their continuous support for assisting

with the sensor unit.


Appendix A: Project Charter

Widener University School of Engineering

Senior Project 2016 - 2017

Project Charter

Project Title Structural Monitoring of a SEPTA Low Clearance Railway Bridge

Project Team Members

Paige Taylor (Team Leader), Patrick Barcalow, Jillian Baxter, Emily Morrison, Jonathan Olson, Morrell Wolf

Project Faculty Advisor

Dr. Xiaochao Tang & Dr. Sohail Sheikh

Project Supporter William Bisirri (Industrial Advisor)

Project Context and Background

SEPTA's railway infrastructure includes numerous bridges that have low clearance heights. The low clearance has led to many vehicle collisions with the bridges. The effects of these collisions are not quantitatively evaluated, hence hindering to make predictions about the structural integrity of the bridge. In order to continuously monitor the bridge, a wireless communications sensor unit was developed to measure acceleration and strains of the bridge.

Problem/Opportunity Statement

Vehicle impact to the underside of a SEPTA bridge could be causing severe structural damage long and short term.

Objective (High Level Scope)

Improve sensors that were developed last year (including: the code, power). Improve finite element analysis by collecting strain and acceleration by vehicle impacts. Incorporate a wireless data information system.

Not in Scope Sensors will not include deterioration/structural health of the bridge or designing and mass producing sensors.

Project Benefits To prevent tragedies due to substructure failures and prevent injuries to the public. In addition, to oversee the integrity of the bridge short and long term

Project Customer SEPTA

Stakeholders Transportation agencies, general public

Key Deliverables Fully functional, cost efficient sensor. Accurate data retrieval from sensor. Detailed report and project presentation poster.

Dependencies Lab access, access to SEPTA bridge to monitor, possible corporate sponsorship

Constraints Permit approval to gain access to SEPTA bridge, installation of sensors on SEPTA bridge

Success Criteria The sensor will be able to accurately measure strain and acceleration.


Issues and Risks Accessibility to SEPTA bridge

Appendix B: Schedule


Appendix C: Budget


Appendix D: Impact Loading

Time (s) Force (lbf) Pressure (psi)

0.00E+00 0 0

0.00187 44429.938 74.10672864

0.00187 50591.755 84.38430524

0.00187 47348.694 78.97505539

0.00364 85292.508 142.2632806

0.00458 129398.14 215.8290861

0.00822 170585.02 284.5265649

0.00907 173828.08 289.9358147

0.00822 170585.02 284.5265649

0.00907 217933.71 363.5016203

0.01271 271444.22 452.7542485

0.01271 303226.22 505.7649008

0.01636 359979.79 600.4267789

0.01729 397923.6 663.7150079

0.02 442029.24 737.2808134

0.02271 479973.05 800.5690423

0.02187 479973.05 800.5690423

0.02458 508187.68 847.6295179

0.02636 524078.68 874.1348441

0.02636 536726.62 895.2309204

0.02729 549374.56 916.3269967

0.02822 565265.56 942.8323229

0.03458 562022.5 937.423073

0.04093 568184.32 947.7006496

0.04187 571427.38 953.1098995

0.04093 568184.32 947.7006496

0.04645 562022.5 937.423073

0.04729 558779.44 932.0138232

0.04729 562022.5 937.423073

0.0528 562022.5 937.423073

0.06093 565265.56 942.8323229

0.06645 562022.5 937.423073

0.06916 562022.5 937.423073

0.07009 562022.5 937.423073

0.06916 562022.5 937.423073

0.0728 562022.5 937.423073


0.07645 558779.44 932.0138232

0.08009 549374.56 916.3269967

0.08187 546131.5 910.9177469

0.08551 539969.68 900.6401703

0.08738 530564.81 884.9533438

0.08822 530564.81 884.9533438

0.08738 530564.81 884.9533438

0.08916 524078.68 874.1348441

0.09458 511430.75 853.0387678

0.09738 486134.87 810.8466152

0.09822 483216.11 805.9782922

0.10187 467325.11 779.472966

0.10551 445272.3 742.6900633

0.10916 423219.48 705.9071605

0.11374 391437.48 652.8965082

0.11832 353817.97 590.1492061

0.11832 356736.73 595.0175291

0.12467 318792.91 531.7293039

0.12467 315874.16 526.8609772

0.12832 287335.22 479.2595747

0.12916 287335.22 479.2595747

0.12916 284092.16 473.8503248

0.13009 284092.16 473.8503248

0.13009 281173.4 468.9819981

0.1328 255877.53 426.7898455

0.1328 259120.59 432.1990953

0.13916 217933.71 363.5016203

0.13832 217933.71 363.5016203

0.13738 217933.71 363.5016203

0.13832 217933.71 363.5016203

0.14196 186476.02 311.0318911

0.14467 157937.08 263.4304886

0.15103 119993.26 200.1422596

0.15103 123236.32 205.5515095

0.15103 119993.26 200.1422596

0.15467 97940.446 163.3593569

0.16009 69725.815 116.2988813

0.16561 37943.816 63.28822893

0.17196 9729.1827 16.22774957

0.17196 12647.939 21.09607631

0.17467 5.112E-11 8.52583E-14


Appendix E: Static Load and Impact Load Results

Deflection (Two

Axels) Deflection (One Cart) Deflection (Half Cart)

X Y X Y X Y

0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

8.00891 0.00 8.0094 0.00 8.00922 0.00

16.0183 -0.01 16.0192 0.00 16.0188 0.00

24.0277 -0.01 24.0289 -0.01 24.0284 -0.01

32.0375 -0.02 32.0389 -0.01 32.0384 -0.01

44.0519 -0.02 44.0536 -0.01 44.053 -0.01

52.0616 -0.03 52.0635 -0.02 52.0628 -0.02

60.0714 -0.03 60.0735 -0.02 60.0728 -0.02

68.0811 -0.04 68.0834 -0.02 68.0825 -0.02

76.0911 -0.04 76.0935 -0.02 76.0925 -0.03

84.1009 -0.05 84.1034 -0.03 84.1024 -0.03

92.1109 -0.05 92.1135 -0.03 92.1124 -0.03

100.121 -0.05 100.123 -0.03 100.122 -0.04

108.131 -0.06 108.134 -0.03 108.132 -0.04

116.141 -0.06 116.144 -0.04 116.142 -0.04

128.156 -0.07 128.159 -0.04 128.157 -0.05

136.166 -0.07 136.169 -0.04 136.167 -0.05

144.176 -0.08 144.179 -0.05 144.178 -0.05

152.187 -0.08 152.189 -0.05 152.188 -0.06

160.197 -0.09 160.199 -0.05 160.198 -0.06

168.207 -0.09 168.21 -0.05 168.208 -0.06

176.217 -0.10 176.22 -0.06 176.218 -0.07

184.228 -0.10 184.23 -0.06 184.228 -0.07

192.238 -0.11 192.24 -0.06 192.238 -0.07

204.254 -0.11 204.256 -0.07 204.254 -0.08

212.264 -0.12 212.266 -0.07 212.264 -0.08

220.274 -0.12 220.276 -0.07 220.274 -0.08

228.285 -0.12 228.286 -0.07 228.285 -0.09

236.295 -0.13 236.297 -0.08 236.295 -0.09

244.306 -0.13 244.307 -0.08 244.305 -0.09

252.316 -0.13 252.317 -0.08 252.315 -0.09

260.327 -0.14 260.328 -0.08 260.326 -0.10

268.337 -0.14 268.338 -0.09 268.336 -0.10

276.348 -0.14 276.349 -0.09 276.347 -0.10


288.364 -0.15 288.364 -0.09 288.362 -0.11

296.374 -0.15 296.375 -0.09 296.373 -0.11

304.385 -0.15 304.385 -0.10 304.383 -0.11

312.395 -0.15 312.396 -0.10 312.394 -0.11

320.406 -0.16 320.406 -0.10 320.404 -0.12

328.417 -0.16 328.417 -0.10 328.415 -0.12

336.427 -0.16 336.427 -0.10 336.425 -0.12

344.438 -0.16 344.438 -0.10 344.436 -0.12

352.448 -0.16 352.449 -0.11 352.446 -0.12

364.464 -0.17 364.464 -0.11 364.462 -0.13

372.475 -0.17 372.475 -0.11 372.473 -0.13

380.486 -0.17 380.486 -0.11 380.483 -0.13

388.496 -0.17 388.496 -0.11 388.494 -0.13

396.507 -0.17 396.507 -0.11 396.505 -0.13

404.517 -0.17 404.517 -0.11 404.515 -0.13

412.528 -0.17 412.528 -0.11 412.526 -0.14

420.539 -0.17 420.539 -0.11 420.537 -0.14

428.549 -0.17 428.549 -0.12 428.547 -0.14

440.565 -0.17 440.565 -0.12 440.563 -0.14

448.576 -0.17 448.576 -0.12 448.574 -0.14

456.587 -0.17 456.587 -0.12 456.585 -0.14

464.597 -0.17 464.597 -0.12 464.595 -0.14

472.608 -0.17 472.608 -0.12 472.606 -0.14

480.619 -0.17 480.618 -0.11 480.617 -0.14

488.63 -0.17 488.629 -0.11 488.627 -0.14

496.64 -0.17 496.64 -0.11 496.638 -0.14

504.651 -0.17 504.65 -0.11 504.648 -0.14

512.661 -0.16 512.661 -0.11 512.659 -0.14

524.677 -0.16 524.677 -0.11 524.675 -0.13

532.688 -0.16 532.687 -0.11 532.686 -0.13

540.699 -0.16 540.698 -0.11 540.696 -0.13

548.709 -0.16 548.708 -0.11 548.707 -0.13

556.72 -0.16 556.719 -0.10 556.717 -0.13

564.731 -0.15 564.729 -0.10 564.728 -0.13

572.741 -0.15 572.74 -0.10 572.739 -0.12

580.752 -0.15 580.75 -0.10 580.749 -0.12

588.763 -0.15 588.761 -0.10 588.76 -0.12

600.778 -0.14 600.776 -0.09 600.775 -0.12

608.789 -0.14 608.787 -0.09 608.786 -0.11

616.799 -0.14 616.797 -0.09 616.796 -0.11

624.81 -0.14 624.808 -0.08 624.807 -0.11


632.82 -0.13 632.818 -0.08 632.817 -0.11

640.831 -0.13 640.828 -0.08 640.828 -0.10

648.841 -0.13 648.839 -0.08 648.838 -0.10

656.852 -0.12 656.849 -0.07 656.849 -0.10

664.862 -0.12 664.859 -0.07 664.859 -0.09

672.873 -0.11 672.87 -0.07 672.869 -0.09

684.888 -0.11 684.885 -0.07 684.885 -0.09

692.898 -0.10 692.895 -0.06 692.895 -0.08

700.909 -0.10 700.906 -0.06 700.906 -0.08

708.919 -0.10 708.916 -0.06 708.916 -0.08

716.929 -0.09 716.926 -0.05 716.926 -0.07

724.939 -0.09 724.936 -0.05 724.937 -0.07

732.949 -0.08 732.946 -0.05 732.947 -0.07

740.959 -0.08 740.956 -0.05 740.957 -0.06

748.97 -0.07 748.967 -0.04 748.967 -0.06

760.985 -0.07 760.982 -0.04 760.982 -0.06

768.995 -0.06 768.992 -0.04 768.992 -0.05

777.005 -0.06 777.002 -0.03 777.003 -0.05

785.015 -0.05 785.012 -0.03 785.013 -0.05

793.025 -0.05 793.022 -0.03 793.023 -0.04

801.034 -0.04 801.032 -0.03 801.033 -0.04

809.044 -0.04 809.042 -0.02 809.043 -0.04

817.054 -0.03 817.052 -0.02 817.053 -0.03

825.064 -0.03 825.062 -0.02 825.062 -0.03

833.074 -0.02 833.072 -0.01 833.072 -0.02

845.088 -0.02 845.087 -0.01 845.087 -0.02

853.098 -0.01 853.096 -0.01 853.097 -0.01

861.107 -0.01 861.106 0.00 861.107 -0.01

869.117 0.00 869.116 0.00 869.116 0.00

877.125 0.00 877.125 0.00 877.125 0.00

Strain (Two Axels) Strain (One Cart) Strain (Half Cart)

X Y X Y X Y

0 -0.0001 0 -6.86E-05 0 -8.51E-05

8.00891 -7.97E-05 8.0094 -4.78E-05 8.00922 -5.79E-05

16.0183 -0.0001 16.0192 -6.35E-05 16.0188 -7.71E-05

24.0277 -8.06E-05 24.0289 -4.84E-05 24.0284 -5.85E-05

32.0375 -8.72E-05 32.0389 -5.37E-05 32.0384 -6.54E-05

44.0519 -5.71E-05 44.0536 -3.61E-05 44.053 -4.42E-05

52.0616 -7.74E-05 52.0635 -5.02E-05 52.0628 -6.18E-05

60.0714 -4.99E-05 60.0735 -3.34E-05 60.0728 -4.15E-05


68.0811 -6.05E-05 68.0834 -4.17E-05 68.0825 -5.20E-05

76.0911 -4.31E-05 76.0935 -3.12E-05 76.0925 -3.92E-05

84.1009 -4.64E-05 84.1034 -3.48E-05 84.1024 -4.39E-05

92.1109 -3.58E-05 92.1135 -2.88E-05 92.1124 -3.68E-05

100.121 -3.36E-05 100.123 -2.87E-05 100.122 -3.68E-05

108.131 -2.75E-05 108.134 -2.58E-05 108.132 -3.35E-05

116.141 -2.26E-05 116.144 -2.29E-05 116.142 -3.00E-05

128.156 -2.18E-05 128.159 -2.50E-05 128.157 -3.35E-05

136.166 -1.08E-05 136.169 -1.44E-05 136.167 -1.98E-05

144.176 -1.38E-05 144.179 -1.96E-05 144.178 -2.73E-05

152.187 -6.22E-06 152.189 -1.15E-05 152.188 -1.66E-05

160.197 -6.46E-06 160.199 -1.43E-05 160.198 -2.11E-05

168.207 -1.37E-06 168.21 -8.81E-06 168.208 -1.38E-05

176.217 1.13E-06 176.22 -9.29E-06 176.218 -1.52E-05

184.228 4.98E-06 184.23 -5.80E-06 184.228 -1.07E-05

192.238 8.74E-06 192.24 -4.72E-06 192.238 -9.80E-06

204.254 1.58E-05 204.256 -2.21E-06 204.254 -7.84E-06

212.264 1.44E-05 212.266 8.66E-07 212.264 -2.40E-06

220.274 2.25E-05 220.276 2.64E-06 220.274 -2.35E-06

228.285 1.82E-05 228.286 4.18E-06 228.285 1.27E-06

236.295 2.65E-05 236.297 7.46E-06 236.295 3.16E-06

244.306 2.12E-05 244.307 7.86E-06 244.305 5.26E-06

252.316 2.89E-05 252.317 1.21E-05 252.315 8.59E-06

260.327 2.48E-05 260.328 1.23E-05 260.326 9.95E-06

268.337 3.09E-05 268.338 1.66E-05 268.336 1.39E-05

276.348 2.91E-05 276.349 1.76E-05 276.347 1.56E-05

288.364 2.69E-05 288.364 1.85E-05 288.362 1.72E-05

296.374 4.07E-05 296.375 2.93E-05 296.373 2.74E-05

304.385 2.90E-05 304.385 2.29E-05 304.383 2.21E-05

312.395 4.36E-05 312.396 3.50E-05 312.394 3.37E-05

320.406 3.08E-05 320.406 2.66E-05 320.404 2.61E-05

328.417 4.48E-05 328.417 3.85E-05 328.415 3.78E-05

336.427 3.29E-05 336.427 2.91E-05 336.425 2.90E-05

344.438 4.47E-05 344.438 3.95E-05 344.436 3.94E-05

352.448 3.57E-05 352.449 3.15E-05 352.446 3.19E-05

364.464 3.42E-05 364.464 3.02E-05 364.462 3.09E-05

372.475 4.91E-05 372.475 4.42E-05 372.473 4.52E-05

380.486 3.52E-05 380.486 3.19E-05 380.483 3.30E-05

388.496 5.10E-05 388.496 4.72E-05 388.494 4.88E-05

396.507 3.66E-05 396.507 3.45E-05 396.505 3.61E-05

404.517 5.25E-05 404.517 5.01E-05 404.515 5.23E-05


412.528 3.80E-05 412.528 3.69E-05 412.526 3.89E-05

420.539 5.33E-05 420.539 5.14E-05 420.537 5.41E-05

428.549 4.01E-05 428.549 3.80E-05 428.547 4.05E-05

440.565 4.19E-05 440.565 3.84E-05 440.563 4.12E-05

448.576 5.51E-05 448.576 4.80E-05 448.574 5.18E-05

456.587 4.23E-05 456.587 3.56E-05 456.585 3.88E-05

464.597 5.69E-05 464.597 4.65E-05 464.595 5.09E-05

472.608 4.25E-05 472.608 3.38E-05 472.606 3.75E-05

480.619 5.67E-05 480.618 4.50E-05 480.617 5.00E-05

488.63 4.17E-05 488.629 3.28E-05 488.627 3.70E-05

496.64 5.47E-05 496.64 4.33E-05 496.638 4.89E-05

504.651 4.01E-05 504.65 3.16E-05 504.648 3.62E-05

512.661 5.19E-05 512.661 4.07E-05 512.659 4.69E-05

524.677 4.75E-05 524.677 3.61E-05 524.675 4.24E-05

532.688 4.00E-05 532.687 2.94E-05 532.686 3.51E-05

540.699 4.74E-05 540.698 3.35E-05 540.696 4.05E-05

548.709 3.85E-05 548.708 2.57E-05 548.707 3.17E-05

556.72 4.70E-05 556.719 3.04E-05 556.717 3.81E-05

564.731 3.71E-05 564.729 2.27E-05 564.728 2.90E-05

572.741 4.47E-05 572.74 2.71E-05 572.739 3.54E-05

580.752 3.44E-05 580.75 2.01E-05 580.749 2.69E-05

588.763 4.02E-05 588.761 2.38E-05 588.76 3.28E-05

600.778 3.27E-05 600.776 1.86E-05 600.775 2.76E-05

608.789 2.88E-05 608.787 1.72E-05 608.786 2.56E-05

616.799 2.78E-05 616.797 1.54E-05 616.796 2.56E-05

624.81 2.31E-05 624.808 1.31E-05 624.807 2.21E-05

632.82 2.27E-05 632.818 1.14E-05 632.817 2.33E-05

640.831 1.81E-05 640.828 8.90E-06 640.828 1.91E-05

648.841 1.73E-05 648.839 6.83E-06 648.838 2.08E-05

656.852 1.32E-05 656.849 4.90E-06 656.849 1.68E-05

664.862 1.06E-05 664.859 1.90E-06 664.859 1.75E-05

672.873 7.84E-06 672.87 9.88E-07 672.869 1.39E-05

684.888 2.36E-06 684.885 -2.71E-06 684.885 1.10E-05

692.898 -1.98E-06 692.895 -6.05E-06 692.895 7.46E-06

700.909 -4.29E-06 700.906 -6.66E-06 700.906 4.79E-06

708.919 -1.01E-05 708.916 -1.13E-05 708.916 -1.89E-07

716.929 -1.02E-05 716.926 -1.02E-05 716.926 -1.55E-06

724.939 -1.88E-05 724.936 -1.69E-05 724.937 -8.33E-06

732.949 -1.53E-05 732.946 -1.33E-05 732.947 -7.00E-06

740.959 -2.74E-05 740.956 -2.24E-05 740.957 -1.63E-05

748.97 -2.03E-05 748.967 -1.64E-05 748.967 -1.20E-05


760.985 -3.22E-05 760.982 -2.43E-05 760.982 -2.13E-05

768.995 -3.47E-05 768.992 -2.58E-05 768.992 -2.41E-05

777.005 -3.77E-05 777.002 -2.72E-05 777.003 -2.65E-05

785.015 -4.44E-05 785.012 -3.13E-05 785.013 -3.22E-05

793.025 -4.34E-05 793.022 -2.99E-05 793.023 -3.18E-05

801.034 -5.60E-05 801.032 -3.79E-05 801.033 -4.18E-05

809.044 -4.87E-05 809.042 -3.25E-05 809.043 -3.66E-05

817.054 -6.88E-05 817.052 -4.52E-05 817.053 -5.18E-05

825.064 -5.33E-05 825.062 -3.47E-05 825.062 -4.02E-05

833.074 -8.11E-05 833.072 -5.22E-05 833.072 -6.06E-05

845.088 -7.09E-05 845.087 -4.54E-05 845.087 -5.22E-05

853.098 -8.66E-05 853.096 -5.46E-05 853.097 -6.53E-05

861.107 -8.88E-05 861.106 -5.61E-05 861.107 -6.58E-05

869.117 -8.22E-05 869.116 -5.03E-05 869.116 -6.39E-05

877.125 -0.00011 877.125 -7.08E-05 877.125 -8.11E-05

Collided Truss Railroad Track Outside Truss

X Y X Y X Y

0 0.00100425 0 0 0 0

4.00758 0.00182411 64.84 0.01959 4.00504 -7.74E-05

8.01538 0.0027653 194.52 0.03072 8.01011 -0.00018

12.0229 0.00371526 259.36 0.03151 12.0151 -0.00029

16.0305 0.0046494 389.04 0.022493 16.0202 -0.00042

20.038 0.00558144 518.72 0.008051 20.0252 -0.00057

24.0453 0.00653421 583.56 0.003033 24.0303 -0.00072

28.0527 0.00748022 713.24 -0.00032 28.0353 -0.00084

32.0601 0.00840273 32.0403 -0.00094

36.0675 0.00930836 36.0453 -0.00103

40.0748 0.0101948 40.0503 -0.00109

44.0822 0.0110568 44.0553 -0.00112

48.0895 0.0118977 48.0603 -0.00114

52.0969 0.012714 52.0653 -0.00113

56.1043 0.0135154 56.0703 -0.00109

60.1117 0.0142982 60.0753 -0.00104

64.1191 0.0150693 64.0804 -0.00096

68.1265 0.0158261 68.0854 -0.00086

72.1339 0.0165721 72.0904 -0.00074

76.1413 0.0173084 76.0955 -0.0006

80.1487 0.018036 80.1005 -0.00045

84.1561 0.0187533 84.1055 -0.00028

88.1635 0.0194598 88.1106 -0.00011


92.1709 0.0201583 92.1156 7.91E-05

96.1784 0.0208469 96.1207 0.000272

100.186 0.0215225 100.126 0.000471

104.193 0.0221869 104.131 0.00068

108.201 0.0228378 108.136 0.000892

112.208 0.0234781 112.141 0.001106

116.215 0.0240999 116.146 0.001322

120.223 0.0247094 120.151 0.00154

124.23 0.0252986 124.156 0.00176

128.238 0.0258756 128.161 0.001976

132.245 0.026429 132.166 0.002192

136.252 0.0269693 136.171 0.002411

140.26 0.0274851 140.176 0.002626

144.267 0.0279865 144.181 0.002839

148.274 0.0284636 148.187 0.003052

152.282 0.0289236 152.192 0.003266

156.289 0.0293608 156.197 0.003476

160.297 0.0297804 160.202 0.003685

164.304 0.0301771 164.207 0.003894

168.311 0.0305551 168.212 0.004104

172.319 0.0309115 172.217 0.004312

176.326 0.0312501 176.222 0.00452

180.334 0.0315683 180.227 0.00473

184.341 0.0318666 184.232 0.004941

188.348 0.0321462 188.237 0.005154

192.356 0.0324075 192.243 0.005369

196.363 0.0326503 196.248 0.005587

200.371 0.0328737 200.253 0.005812

204.378 0.0330805 204.258 0.006036

208.385 0.0332683 208.263 0.006267

212.393 0.0334415 212.33 0.006508

216.4 0.0335962 216.367 0.006753

220.408 0.0337361 220.39 0.007001

224.415 0.0338594 224.405 0.007255

228.422 0.0339701 228.417 0.007518

232.43 0.0340641 232.426 0.007786

236.437 0.0341442 236.434 0.00806

240.445 0.0342119 240.441 0.008341

244.452 0.0342673 244.449 0.00863

248.459 0.034306 248.456 0.008925

252.467 0.0343331 252.463 0.009224


256.474 0.0343485 256.471 0.009532

260.482 0.0343519 260.478 0.009846

264.489 0.0343419 264.486 0.010164

268.496 0.0343195 268.493 0.010487

272.504 0.0342884 272.5 0.010815

276.511 0.0342442 276.508 0.011148

280.519 0.0341871 280.515 0.011483

284.526 0.03412 284.523 0.01182

288.526 0.0340398 292.53 0.012506

288.526 0.0340398 296.53 0.012848

292.526 0.0339478 300.53 0.013192

296.526 0.0338368 304.531 0.013536

300.526 0.0337177 308.531 0.013882

304.526 0.0335842 312.531 0.014222

308.526 0.03344 316.531 0.014564

312.526 0.0332788 320.531 0.014903

316.526 0.0331063 324.531 0.015239

320.526 0.0329239 328.531 0.015571

324.526 0.0327229 332.531 0.015901

328.526 0.0325097 336.531 0.016227

332.526 0.0322854 340.531 0.016549

336.526 0.0320491 344.532 0.016865

340.526 0.0317997 348.532 0.01718

344.526 0.0315345 352.532 0.017489

348.526 0.0312605 356.532 0.017794

352.526 0.0309778 360.532 0.018092

356.526 0.0306809 364.532 0.018389

360.526 0.0303741 368.532 0.01868

364.526 0.0300597 372.533 0.018967

368.526 0.0297342 376.533 0.019247

372.526 0.0293988 380.533 0.019525

376.526 0.0290538 384.533 0.019797

380.525 0.028705 388.533 0.020064

384.525 0.0283453 392.533 0.020325

388.525 0.0279753 396.533 0.020582

392.525 0.0276012 400.533 0.020834

396.525 0.0272235 404.534 0.021079

400.525 0.0268387 408.534 0.021319

404.525 0.0264436 412.534 0.021553

408.525 0.0260486 416.534 0.021782

412.525 0.0256518 420.534 0.022003


416.525 0.0252439 424.534 0.022219

420.525 0.0248308 428.535 0.022428

424.525 0.0244203 436.54 0.022829

432.531 0.0235764 440.546 0.02302

436.536 0.0231464 444.551 0.023205

440.541 0.0227263 448.556 0.023383

444.547 0.0222978 452.562 0.023555

448.552 0.0218639 456.567 0.023718

452.557 0.0214271 460.572 0.023876

456.563 0.0209979 464.578 0.024025

460.568 0.0205621 468.583 0.024168

464.573 0.0201219 472.588 0.024302

468.578 0.0196827 476.594 0.024429

472.584 0.0192439 480.599 0.024548

476.589 0.0188008 484.604 0.024661

480.594 0.0183518 488.61 0.024764

484.6 0.0179075 492.615 0.024862

488.605 0.0174609 496.62 0.024949

492.61 0.0170109 500.626 0.025032

496.616 0.0165563 504.631 0.025104

500.621 0.0161086 508.636 0.025172

504.626 0.0156597 512.642 0.02523

508.632 0.015209 516.647 0.025283

512.637 0.0147576 520.653 0.025327

516.642 0.0143144 524.658 0.025366

520.647 0.0138716 528.663 0.025397

524.653 0.0134298 532.669 0.025422

528.658 0.0129912 536.674 0.025438

532.663 0.012561 540.679 0.025449

536.669 0.0121345 544.685 0.025452

540.674 0.0117096 548.69 0.025447

544.679 0.0112934 552.696 0.025435

548.685 0.0108843 556.701 0.025417

552.69 0.0104803 560.706 0.025391

556.695 0.0100792 564.712 0.025357

560.701 0.00968862 568.717 0.025315

564.706 0.00930369 572.722 0.025267

568.711 0.00892445 576.728 0.02521

572.717 0.00854766 580.733 0.025145

576.722 0.00818087 584.738 0.025071

580.727 0.00781873 588.744 0.024991


584.732 0.00746111 592.749 0.0249

588.738 0.00710525 596.755 0.024801

592.743 0.00676055 600.76 0.024693

596.748 0.00641779 604.765 0.024576

600.754 0.00607909 608.771 0.024448

604.759 0.00574359 612.776 0.024309

608.764 0.00541798 616.781 0.02416

612.77 0.00509673 620.787 0.024001

616.775 0.00477638 624.792 0.023829

620.78 0.00446409 628.797 0.023644

624.786 0.00415929 632.803 0.023448

628.791 0.00386044 636.808 0.023239

632.796 0.00356358 640.813 0.023017

636.802 0.00327689 644.819 0.022781

640.807 0.00299831 648.824 0.022532

644.812 0.00272633 652.829 0.022272

648.818 0.00245977 656.835 0.021996

652.823 0.00220446 660.84 0.021708

656.828 0.00196039 664.845 0.021407

660.834 0.00172272 668.851 0.021093

664.839 0.00149422 672.856 0.020766

668.844 0.00127753 676.862 0.020425

672.85 0.00107373 680.867 0.020077

676.855 0.00087695 684.872 0.019713

680.86 0.000692566 688.878 0.019339

684.866 0.000520944 692.883 0.018953

688.871 0.000361395 696.888 0.01856

692.876 0.000210769 700.893 0.018155

696.882 7.22E-05 704.899 0.017741

700.887 -5.32E-05 708.904 0.017318

704.892 -0.000167225 712.909 0.01689

708.898 -0.000271471 716.915 0.016452

712.903 -0.000364861 720.92 0.016008

716.908 -0.000446154 724.926 0.015559

720.914 -0.00051686 728.931 0.015105

724.919 -0.000577547 732.936 0.014647

728.924 -0.000628944 736.941 0.014183

732.93 -0.000669684 740.947 0.013719

736.935 -0.000702318 744.952 0.013251

740.94 -0.000727592 748.957 0.012783

744.946 -0.000746001 752.963 0.012313


748.951 -0.000756778 756.968 0.011847

752.956 -0.000763329 760.973 0.01138

756.962 -0.000766026 764.979 0.010917

760.967 -0.000764174 768.984 0.010456

764.972 -0.000756178 772.989 0.010003

768.978 -0.0007479 776.994 0.009552

772.983 -0.000736417 781 0.00911

776.988 -0.000724023 785.005 0.008672

780.994 -0.000707839 789.01 0.008246

784.999 -0.000691032 793.015 0.007823

789.004 -0.000671642 797.021 0.007412

793.01 -0.000653576 801.026 0.007006

797.015 -0.000633061 805.031 0.00661

801.02 -0.000610059 809.037 0.00622

805.026 -0.000584459 813.042 0.005839

809.031 -0.00055597 817.047 0.005462

813.036 -0.000530142 821.053 0.005092

817.042 -0.000498084 825.058 0.004725

821.047 -0.000464039 829.063 0.004359

825.052 -0.000429437 833.068 0.003995

829.058 -0.00039218 837.074 0.003628

833.063 -0.000354964 841.079 0.003263

837.068 -0.000314746 845.085 0.002895

841.074 -0.000274971 849.09 0.00253

845.079 -0.000232191 853.095 0.002167

849.084 -0.00018766 857.1 0.001816

853.09 -0.000141887 861.106 0.001466

857.095 -8.60E-05 865.111 0.001097

861.1 -4.52E-05 869.116 0.000723

865.106 -1.63E-05 873.121 0.0004

869.111 1.88E-05 877.126 0


Appendix F: Architecture of Wireless Sensor Unit


Appendix G: Coding for Sensor Units

// Importing SD card library #include "SparkTime/SparkTime.h" #include "SdFat/SdFat.h" SdFatSoftSpi<D1, D2, D3> sd; const int chipSelect = D0;

UDP UDPClient; SparkTime rtc;

// Constants initialization int misop = D1;

int mosip = D2; int xread = A2; int stra = A4; int yread = A0; int zread = A1; int x = 0; int y = 0;

int z = 0; int s = 0; int dum = 0; File mf; unsigned long currentTime; String tm;

void setup() { Serial.begin(115200); //begin serial monitor rtc.begin(&UDPClient, "north-america.pool.ntp.org"); //Time initialization rtc.setTimeZone(-5);

pinMode(chipSelect, OUTPUT); digitalWrite(chipSelect, LOW); sd.begin(chipSelect, SPI_FULL_SPEED); // initialize sd with full speed Serial.println("Made connection"); mf = sd.open("Mar_30.csv", FILE_WRITE); //open log file

}

void loop() { // once file is open if (mf) { Serial.println("Attempting to print to SD Card...");

mf.println("Please report back to Enrique-Paco immediately!!!"); Serial.println("Writing..."); // Grab initial time tm = "" + rtc.hour12String(rtc.now()) + ":" + rtc.minuteString(rtc.now()) + ":" +


rtc.secondString(rtc.now());

Serial.println(tm); mf.println("" + tm);

while (dum <= 40000) { x = analogRead(xread); y = analogRead(yread); z = analogRead(zread); s = analogRead(stra); // Print to serial monitor

Serial.println(dum); // Serial.print(" "); // Serial.print(tm); // Serial.print(" "); // Serial.print(x); // Serial.print(" ");

// Serial.print(y); // Serial.print(" "); // Serial.print(z); // Serial.print(" "); // Serial.println(s);

// Log to SD card mf.print(dum); mf.print(","); // mf.print(tm); // mf.print(","); // mf.print(x); // mf.print(",");

// mf.print(y); // mf.print(",");

// mf.print(z); // mf.print(","); mf.println(s);

// if (dum%100 == 0) { // tm = "" + rtc.hour12String(rtc.now()) + ":" + rtc.minuteString(rtc.now()) + ":" + rtc.secondString(rtc.now()); // Serial.println(tm); // mf.println(tm); // }

if (dum == 40000) { tm = "" + rtc.hour12String(rtc.now()) + ":" + rtc.minuteString(rtc.now()) + ":" + rtc.secondString(rtc.now());

Serial.println(tm); mf.println("" + tm); mf.close();

Serial.println("Done"); } dum++; //delay (100); }

} }

Widener University - ASTM International · Senior Project Team 10 – Final Report 13 Figure 2...

Documents

Transcript of Widener University - ASTM International · Senior Project Team 10 – Final Report 13 Figure 2...