## 3 Simulation Experiment
### Results Analysis
#### 3.2.2 Analysis of Jacking Data Fusion Effects  
By conducting finite element simulation experiments on Cases 2, 3, and 4, the simulation measurement data in Tables 4 and 5 can be obtained. Among them, Table 4 presents the strain gauge measurement data before jacking, and Table 5 presents the jacking displacement, jacking force, and strain gauge measurement data after the bearing is disengaged during the jacking process. Based on the simulation measurement data from Table 5, the Monte Carlo method is used to obtain the simulation results of the JM and the JM(fusion), as shown in Figure 10. Table 6 provides the mean and standard deviation of the measurement results of the JM and JM(fusion). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Serial Number**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Standard Load/N**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Stress at Strain Gauge Measurement Section/MPa**} \\  & & **Section 1** & **Section 2** & **Section 3** & **Section 4** \\ \hline Case 2 & 26,425 & \(-1.173\) & \(-0.409\) & \(-0.891\) & \(-2.115\) \\ Case 3 & 26,381 & \(-1.183\) & \(-0.435\) & \(-0.868\) & \(-2.101\) \\ Case 4 & 23,689 & \(-1.617\) & \(-1.023\) & \(-1.912\) & \(-2.779\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Simulation measurement data for Cases 2, 3, and 4 (before jacking). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Serial Number**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Jacking Displacement/mm**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Jacking Force/N**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Stress at Strain Gauge Measurement Section/MPa**} \\  & & & **Section 1** & **Section 2** & **Section 3** & **Section 4** \\ \hline Case 2 & 0.135 & 28,830 & 0.387 & 1.771 & \(-1.999\) & \(-3.070\) \\ Case 2 & 0.193 & 29,370 & 0.477 & 1.929 & \(-1.838\) & \(-2.946\) \\  & 0.251 & 29,910 & 0.571 & 2.089 & \(-1.677\) & \(-2.822\) \\ \hline Case 3 & 0.103 & 26,225 & \(-2.033\) & \(-1.557\) & 0.779 & \(-0.692\) \\ Case 3 & 0.231 & 27,275 & \(-2.016\) & \(-1.419\) & \(1.247\) & \(-0.305\) \\  & 0.384 & 28,500 & \(-1.987\) & \(-1.250\) & \(1.798\) & \(0.150\) \\ \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Case 4} & 0.084 & 25,450 & \(-0.504\) & 0.545 & \(-2.714\) & \(-3.466\) \\  & 0.127 & 25,900 & \(-0.451\) & 0.656 & \(-2.587\) & \(-3.369\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Simulation measurement data for Cases 2, 3, and 4 (jacking process). From Table 6 in conjunction with Figure 10, it can be observed that the jacking measurement results obtained through fusion with redundant strain data have a mean closer to the standard load and a smaller standard deviation. The measurement accuracy of the JM is lower when there is an assumed support point deviation compared to when there is no assumed support point deviation. Under the conditions of each case, the JM based on fused data has a minimum and maximum difference between the mean and the standard load of 3 N and 10 N, respectively, with a minimum and maximum standard deviation of 342 N and 382 N, respectively. In contrast, the JM has a minimum and maximum difference between the mean and the standard load of 10 N and 13 N, respectively, with a minimum and maximum standard deviation of 356 N and 390 N, respectively. Compared to the JM, the standard deviation of the jacking data fusion results can be reduced by a minimum of 1.8% and a maximum of 3.9%. 2.3 Analysis of the Application Effects of the Fusion Measurement Method Based on Redundant Strain Data and Jacking Data  
The simulation results of various measurement methods obtained using the Monte Carlo method based on the simulation measurement data from Tables 4 and 5 are shown in Figure 11, and Table 7 provides the mean and standard deviation of the measurement results for each measurement method.