MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413760690 · doi:10.24904/footbridge2025.70

Fatigue Loading Analysis of Pedestrian Bridges at High Volume Transportation Hubs

2025· article· en· W4413760690 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew Park, Scott Walbridge

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedestrianTransport engineeringVolume (thermodynamics)Traffic volumeComputer scienceStructural engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Pedestrian bridges serve as important pieces of infrastructure in urban environments, facilitating the safe movement of people across busy roads and other barriers. With the growth of cities, increase in urban density, and therefore the continuous growth of pedestrian traffic, understanding the structural integrity of pedestrian bridges under the full range of possible loading conditions is of critical importance. The research presented in this paper focuses on the fatigue analysis of pedestrian bridges under cyclic pedestrian loads. In the presented analytical study, high volume pedestrian load events are simulated, corresponding with the arrival of trains at a busy public transportation hub. Train volumes and arrival frequencies are varied, and the transportation software PTV VISSIM is used along with a bridge influence surface to simulate pedestrian traffic flow and establish the load effect ranges and frequencies needed for fatigue assessment. The transportation hub used as an example in this study is a train station at the outskirts of Toronto, Ontario, which is connected by a pedestrian bridge to a nearby parking facility. Due to traffic volume uncertainty, the CSA S7-23 pedestrian, cycling, and multiuse bridge design guideline takes the approach of establishing a design stress range below which the fatigue life can be assumed adequate over the service life regardless of traffic volume. The results of this study show that the CSA S7-23 design stress range, which corresponds with a cyclic live load of 0.85 kPa, is on the safe side for the investigated structure.</p>

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207