加拿大土木工程论文代写：桥梁结构
故障发生是由于同步侧向消光。在千禧桥的运动基本上是由横向荷载作用，这是没有预料到的桥梁设计。这种负载效应被发现由于横向的足球力量，由于大量的行人在桥上发生的同步。这是因为桥的摇晃最初是非常小的。结果发现，与桥的运动相互作用是可以预见的行人和这种相互作用有助于保持横向平衡行人（帕维奇，A.，雷诺兹，P.，赖特，J. 2001）。这种本能的行为，确保足球部队适用于共振频率的桥梁。
这也适用于一个阶段，如增加桥梁的运动。随着桥的运动振幅的增加，从个人到桥的横向力的增加，因为个人之间的相关性的程度上的桥梁。所有这一切，它造成了不可接受的振动水平上的桥梁。对于这座桥梁结构的破坏，虽然有任何量化知道的横向力的发生，由于行人还没有完成。此外，还没有相关的数据显示的力和甲板力的运动之间的关系。
经过广泛的模型测试的桥梁，人们发现，每种模式的阻尼约0.6至0.8%的临界极限。这表明，对于桥梁的设计，假设为0.5%的临界值是保守的，但假设是错误的人群来到桥的开幕之日。在设计分析中预测的振动值在10%以内的模态频率测量。这表明，设计模型实际预测的桥梁。说明所建结构是真实的模型，是有效的。这意味着运动是由于不可预知的外部力量或者称为算错了桥梁动力，例如行人。
加拿大土木工程论文代写：桥梁结构
The failure happened because of synchronous lateral extinction. The movement at the Millennium Bridge was substantially caused by lateral loading effect which was not anticipated during the bridge design. This loading effect was found due to the synchronization of lateral football forces which occurred due the large crowd of pedestrians on the bridge. This arose because of the swaying of the bridge which was very small initially. It was found by the pedestrians that their interaction with the movement of the bridge is more predictable and this interaction helps the pedestrians to maintain their lateral balance (Pavic, A., Reynolds, P., Wright, J. 2001). This kind of instinctive behaviour ensures the football forces to apply at the resonant frequency of the bridge.
This is also applied with a phase such as to increase the motion of the bridge. With this as soon as the amplitude of the bridge motion increases, the lateral forces exerted from the individuals to the bridge increases because of the degree of correlation between individuals on the bridge. With all this, it caused the unacceptable vibrations level on the bridge. For this bridge structure failure, though there any quantification to know the amount of lateral forces that occurred due to the pedestrian has not been done yet. Also, there is no relevant data available that shows the relationship between the force exerted and the movement of the deck force.
After extensive model testing of the bridge, it was found that the damping for each mode was around 0.6 to 0.8% of the critical limit. This shows that for the design of the bridge, the assumption was 0.5% of critical value to be conservative, but the assumption became wrong with the crowd that came to bridge on the day of opening. The mode frequencies were measured as within 10% of vibration values which was predicted in the design analysis. This indicates that the design models were realistically predicted for the bridge. This explains that the built structure was the realistic model and was valid. This means that the movements were due to an unpredicted external force or called as miscalculated bridge dynamic force, for example the crowd of pedestrians.
