基于气动模型的大跨度桥梁抖振与颤振的比较评估

Igor Kavrakov, Guido Morgenthal

工程（英文） ›› 2017, Vol. 3 ›› Issue (6) : 823-838.

PDF(4590 KB)
PDF(4590 KB)
工程（英文） ›› 2017, Vol. 3 ›› Issue (6) : 823-838. DOI: 10.1016/j.eng.2017.11.008
研究论文
Research

基于气动模型的大跨度桥梁抖振与颤振的比较评估

作者信息 +

A Comparative Assessment of Aerodynamic Models for Buffeting and Flutter of Long-Span Bridges

Author information +
History +

Abstract

Wind-induced vibrations commonly represent the leading criterion in the design of long-span bridges. The aerodynamic forces in bridge aerodynamics are mainly based on the quasi-steady and linear unsteady theory. This paper aims to investigate different formulations of self-excited and buffeting forces in the time domain by comparing the dynamic response of a multi-span cable-stayed bridge during the critical erection condition. The bridge is selected to represent a typical reference object with a bluff concrete box girder for large river crossings. The models are viewed from a perspective of model complexity, comparing the influence of the aerodynamic properties implied in the aerodynamic models, such as aerodynamic damping and stiffness, fluid memory in the buffeting and self-excited forces, aerodynamic nonlinearity, and aerodynamic coupling on the bridge response. The selected models are studied for a wind-speed range that is typical for the construction stage for two levels of turbulence intensity. Furthermore, a simplified method for the computation of buffeting forces including the aerodynamic admittance is presented, in which rational approximation is avoided. The critical flutter velocities are also compared for the selected models under laminar flow.

Keywords

Buffeting / Flutter / Long-span bridges / Bridge aerodynamics / Bridge aeroelasticity / Erection stage

引用本文

EndNote

Ris (Procite)

Bibtex

导出引用
Igor Kavrakov, Guido Morgenthal. 基于气动模型的大跨度桥梁抖振与颤振的比较评估. Engineering. 2017, 3(6): 823-838 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2017.11.008

参考文献

原文顺序 | 文献年度倒序 | 文中引用次数倒序
[1]
G. Morgenthal, Y. Yamasaki. Behaviour of very long cable-stayed bridges during erection. Proc Inst Civ Eng—Bridge Eng, 163 (4) (2010), pp. 213-224. DOI: 10.1680/bren.2010.4.213
[2]
R.H. Scanlan. The action of flexible bridges under wind, I: Flutter theory. J Sound Vib, 60 (2) (1978), pp. 187-199
[3]
R.H. Scanlan. The action of flexible bridges under wind, II: buffeting theory. J Sound Vib, 60 (2) (1978), pp. 201-211
[4]
A.G. Davenport. The response of slender, line-like structures to a gusty wind. Proc Inst Civ Eng, 23 (3) (1962), pp. 389-408. DOI: 10.1680/iicep.1962.10876
[5]
G. Diana, S. Bruni, A. Cigada, A. Collina. Turbulence effect on flutter velocity in long span suspended bridges. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 48 (2-3) (1993), pp. 329-342
[6]
X.Z. Chen, A. Kareem. Advances in modeling of aerodynamic forces on bridge decks. J Eng Mech, 128 (11) (2002), pp. 1193-1205
[7]
Y.J. Ge, H.F. Xiang. Computational models and methods for aerodynamic flutter of long-span bridges. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 96 (10-11) (2008), pp. 1912-1924
[8]
G. Morgenthal, A.S. Corriols, B. Bendig. A GPU-accelerated pseudo-3D vortex method for aerodynamic analysis. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 125 (2014), pp. 69-80
[9]
A. Larsen, J.H. Walther. Aeroelastic analysis of bridge girder sections based on discrete vortex simulations. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 67-68 (1997), pp. 253-265
[10]
I. Kovacs, H.S. Svensson, E. Jordet. Analytical aerodynamic investigation of cable-stayed Helgeland Bridge. J Struct Eng, 118 (1) (1992), pp. 147-168
[11]
C. Borri, C. Costa. Quasi-steady analysis of a two-dimensional bridge deck element. Comput Struct, 82 (13-14) (2004), pp. 993-1006
[12]
R.H. Scanlan, J.G. B’eliveau, K.S. Budlong. Indicial aerodynamic functions for bridge decks. J Eng Mech, 100 (1974), pp. 657-672. DOI: 10.1061/jmcea3.0001912
[13]
L. Caracoglia, N.P. Jones. Time domain vs. frequency domain characterization of aeroelastic forces for bridge deck sections. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 91 (3) (2003), pp. 371-402
[14]
X.Z. Chen, M. Matsumoto, A. Kareem. Time domain flutter and buffeting response analysis of bridges. J Eng Mech, 126 (1) (2000), pp. 7-16
[15]
K. Wilde, Y. Fujino, J. Masukawa. Time domain modeling of bridge deck flutter. J Struct Mech Earthquake Eng, 13 (2) (1996), pp. 19-30. DOI: 10.2208/jscej.1996.543_19
[16]
O. Øiseth, A. Rönnquist, R. Sigbjörnsson. Simplified prediction of wind-induced response and stability limit of slender long-span suspension bridges, based on modified quasi-steady theory: a case study. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 98 (12) (2010), pp. 730-741
[17]
X.Z. Chen, A. Kareem. Advanced analysis of coupled buffeting response of bridges: a complex modal decomposition approach. Probabilist Eng Mech, 17 (2) (2002), pp. 201-213
[18]
X.Z. Chen, A. Kareem. Nonlinear response analysis of long-span bridges under turbulent winds. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 89 (14-15) (2001), pp. 1335-1350
[19]
G. Diana, D. Rocchi, T. Argentini. An experimental validation of a band superposition model of the aerodynamic forces acting on multi-box deck sections. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 113 (2013), pp. 40-58
[20]
G. Diana, F. Resta, D. Rocchi. A new numerical approach to reproduce bridge aerodynamic non-linearities in time domain. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 96 (10-11) (2008), pp. 1871-1884
[21]
G. Diana, D. Rocchi, T. Argentini, S. Muggiasca. Aerodynamic instability of a bridge deck section model: linear and nonlinear approach to force modeling. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 98 (6-7) (2010), pp. 363-374
[22]
T. Wu, A. Kareem. A nonlinear convolution scheme to simulate bridge aerodynamics. Comput Struct, 128 (2013), pp. 259-271
[23]
F. Petrini, F. Giuliano, F. Bontempi. Comparison of time domain techniques for the evaluation of the response and the stability in long span suspension bridges. Comput Struct, 85 (11-14) (2007), pp. 1032-1048
[24]
L. Salvatori, C. Borri. Frequency- and time-domain methods for the numerical modeling of full-bridge aeroelasticity. Comput Struct, 85 (11-14) (2007), pp. 675-687
[25]
M. Lazzari. Time domain modelling of aeroelastic bridge decks: a comparative study and an application. Int J Numer Meth Eng, 62 (8) (2005), pp. 1064-1104. DOI: 10.1002/nme.1238
[26]
T. Wu, A. Kareem. Revisiting convolution scheme in bridge aerodynamics: comparison of step and impulse response functions. J Eng Mech, 140 (5) (2014), pp. 1-13
[27]
M. Lazzari, R.V. Vitalini, A.V. Saetta. Aeroelastic forces and dynamic response of long-span bridges. Int J Numer Meth Eng, 60 (6) (2004), pp. 1011-1048
[28]
O. Øiseth, A. Rönnquist, R. Sigbjörnsson. Time domain modeling of self-excited aerodynamic forces for cable-supported bridges: a comparative study. Comput Struct, 89 (13-14) (2011), pp. 1306-1322
[29]
T. Wu, A. Kareem. Bridge aerodynamics and aeroelasticity: a comparison of modeling schemes. J Fluid Struct, 43 (2013), pp. 347-370
[30]
H. Katsuchi, N.P. Jones, R.H. Scanlan, H. Akiyama. Multi-mode flutter and buffeting analysis of the Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 77-78 (1998), pp. 431-441
[31]
T. Abbas, I. Kavrakov, G. Morgenthal. Methods for flutter stability analysis of long-span bridges: A review. Bridge Eng, 170 (4) (2017), pp. 271-310. DOI: 10.1680/jbren.15.00039
[32]
F. Tubino. Relationships among aerodynamic admittance functions, flutter derivatives and static coefficients for long-span bridges. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 93 (12) (2005), pp. 929-950
[33]
T. Argentini, D. Rocchi, S. Muggiasca, A. Zasso. Cross-sectional distributions versus integrated coefficients of flutter derivatives and aerodynamic admittances identified with surface pressure measurement. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 104-106 (2012), pp. 152-158
[34]
G. Diana, S. Bruni, A. Cigada, E. Zappa. Complex aerodynamic admittance function role in buffeting response of a bridge deck. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 90 (12-15) (2002), pp. 2057-2072
[35]
G.L. Larose. Experimental determination of the aerodynamic admittance of a bridge deck segment. J Fluid Struct, 13 (7-8) (1999), pp. 1029-1040
[36]
A.K. Chopra.Dynamics of structures. (4th ed.), Pearson, London (2011)
[37]
Z.Q. Chen, Y. Han, X.G. Hua, Y.Z. Luo. Investigation on influence factors of buffeting response of bridges and its aeroelastic model verification for Xiaoguan Bridge. Eng Struct, 31 (2) (2009), pp. 417-431
[38]
X.Z. Chen, A. Kareem. Aeroelastic analysis of bridges under multicorrelated winds: integrated state-space approach. J Eng Mech, 127 (11) (2001), pp. 1124-1134
[39]
G. Morgenthal. Aerodynamic analysis of structures using high-resolution vortex particle methods [dissertation]. University of Cambridge, Cambridge (2002)
[40]
R.H. Scanlan. Motion-related body-force functions in two-dimensional low-speed flow. J Fluid Struct, 14 (1) (2000), pp. 49-63
[41]
Q.S. Ding, L.D. Zhu, H.F. Xiang. An efficient ergodic simulation of multivariate stochastic processes with spectral representation. Probabilist Eng Mech, 26 (2) (2011), pp. 350-356
[42]
G. Solari, G. Piccardo. Probabilistic 3D turbulence modeling for gust buffeting of structures. Probabilist Eng Mech, 16 (1) (2001), pp. 73-86
[43]
Y.J. Ge, H. Tanaka. Aerodynamic flutter analysis of cable-supported bridges by multi-mode and full-mode approaches. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 86 (2-3) (2000), pp. 123-153
[44]
A. Larsen, J.H. Walther. Discrete vortex simulation of flow around five generic bridge deck sections. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 72-78 (1998), pp. 591-602
[45]
M. Matsumoto, Y. Daito, F. Yoshizumi, Y. Ichikawa, T. Yabutani. Torsional flutter of bluff bodies. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod, 69-71 (1997), pp. 871-882
PDF(4590 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail
段落导航
相关文章

/

〈 〉