During the last two decades, Global Positioning System (GPS) geodetic‐grade receivers and accelerometers have been implemented in Structural Health Monitoring (SHM). Most recently, the use of sensors integrated in smartphones has been evolving. Although some of their capabilities are validated for small and local structures, there is a gap in knowledge about the use of sensors embedded in smartphones and other electronic devices for SHM of complex structures as bridges. To contribute in this area, this paper demonstrates the application of GPS receivers, accelerometers, and smartphones, integrating a smart sensor for the SHM of bridges. In order to validate its capabilities, the alternative smart sensor is used to study a particular bridge with vibration problems. Semistatic and dynamic displacements are obtained by means of GPS measurements. Accelerations in three directions of the bridge are determined using the accelerometer and the smartphone. Based on the results of the alternative smart sensor, inappropriate structural behavior is detected in the vertical direction of the bridge. In addition, dynamic characteristics are extracted using the smart sensor applying the Fast Fourier Transformation (FFT) and periodogram to the structural responses. As a result, it is verified the applicability of the fused smart sensor for SHM on real‐scale bridges.

Geomagnetic storms can severely disturb the ionosphere, degrading Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) performance, particularly at low latitudes. The 10 May 2024 superstorm produced a strong ionospheric response across Mexico, with well-defined positive and negative phases observed at all analyzed stations. The proximity in time of %dTEC peaks to the second and third steps of the storm’s main phase, together with their local time dependence, indicates that Prompt Penetration Electric Fields (PPEFs) dominated the initial positive phase on the dayside. These eastward electric fields uplifted the F-region plasma, enhancing TEC values—especially at northern stations, where increases reached ±180%. In contrast, the subsequent nighttime depletion and extended recovery were mainly driven by composition-related plasma loss and enhanced recombination. A suppression of TEC followed the positive phase, with depletions between −58% and −77%, showing a persistent latitudinal gradient. Low-cost GNSS receivers successfully captured these ionospheric signatures but exhibited higher positioning degradation—up to 50% greater than geodetic-grade receivers. Multi-constellation Precise Point Positioning (PPP) mitigated these effects, reducing 3D errors by up to 23% and 53% in geodetic and low-cost receivers, respectively. These findings reveal the day–night dependence of ionospheric storm phases and underscore the importance of regional multi-GNSS monitoring during extreme space weather.