Aerodynamic admittance functions and buffeting forces for bridges via indicial functions

Abstract Buffeting forces on bridge decks are commonly modelled by Sears’ function. However, it is well known that Sears’ function is reliable only for very streamlined bridge deck sections and that a complete model would require a suitable formulation of buffeting forces in time domain. In this paper, self-excited and buffeting loads are modelled by means of indicial functions. Corresponding aerodynamic admittance functions are numerically evaluated for rectangular sections and compared with experimental and analytical results. A complete time-domain model for cross-sections including vertical turbulence is presented. Numerical simulations are performed on a sample rectangular section. Comparison with experimental results and relevant flutter analyses are also discussed.

[1]  H. Tanaka,et al.  New Estimation Method of Aerodynamic Admittance Function , 2001 .

[2]  R. Sankaran,et al.  Direct measurement of the aerodynamic admittance of two-dimensional rectangular cylinders in smooth and turbulent flows , 1992 .

[3]  Hiromichi Shirato,et al.  The influence of aerodynamic derivatives on flutter , 1996 .

[4]  Guy L. Larose,et al.  Performance of streamlined bridge decks in relation to the aerodynamics of a flat plate , 1997 .

[5]  Kazutoshi Matsuda,et al.  Aerodynamic admittance and the `strip theory’ for horizontal buffeting forces on a bridge deck , 1999 .

[6]  M. Kawatani,et al.  Evaluation of aerodynamic admittance for buffeting analysis , 1992 .

[7]  W. Sears,et al.  Some Aspects of Non-Stationary Airfoil Theory and Its Practical Application , 1941 .

[8]  M. Matsumoto,et al.  Torsional flutter of bluff bodies , 1997 .

[9]  H. W. Liepmann,et al.  Extension of the Statistical Approach to Buffeting and Gust Response of Wings of Finite Span , 1955 .

[10]  Emanuele Zappa,et al.  Complex aerodynamic admittance function role in buffeting response of a bridge deck , 2001 .

[11]  Robert H. Scanlan,et al.  AIR FOIL AND BRIDGE DECK FLUTTER DERIVATIVES , 1971 .

[12]  Robert H. Scanlan,et al.  MOTION-RELATED BODY-FORCE FUNCTIONS IN TWO-DIMENSIONAL LOW-SPEED FLOW , 2000 .

[13]  Federica Tubino,et al.  Relationships among aerodynamic admittance functions, flutter derivatives and static coefficients for long-span bridges , 2005 .

[14]  Alberto Zasso,et al.  Forced motion and free motion aeroelastic tests on a new concept dynamometric section model of the Messina suspension bridge , 2004 .

[15]  Robert H. Scanlan,et al.  Problematics in Formulation of Wind‐Force Models for Bridge Decks , 1993 .

[16]  Nicholas P. Jones,et al.  A FORM OF AERODYNAMIC ADMITTANCE FOR USE IN BRIDGE AEROELASTIC ANALYSIS , 1999 .

[17]  Ahsan Kareem,et al.  Nonlinear response analysis of long-span bridges under turbulent winds , 2001 .

[18]  Robert H. Scanlan,et al.  Role of Indicial Functions in Buffeting Analysis of Bridges , 1984 .

[19]  Herbert Wagner Über die Entstehung des dynamischen Auftriebes von Tragflügeln , 1925 .

[20]  J. Mann,et al.  Gust loading on streamlined bridge decks , 1998 .

[21]  Nicholas P. Jones,et al.  A minimum design methodology for evaluating bridge flutter and buffeting response , 1990 .

[22]  Yuan-Cheng Fung,et al.  An introduction to the theory of aeroelasticity , 1955 .

[23]  W. H. Melbourne,et al.  The aerodynamic admittance of two-dimensional rectangular section cylinders in smooth flow , 1986 .

[24]  Gianni Bartoli,et al.  Flutter mechanism for rectangular prisms in smooth and turbulent flow , 2006 .

[25]  T. Theodorsen General Theory of Aerodynamic Instability and the Mechanism of Flutter , 1934 .

[26]  Claudio Borri,et al.  Application of indicial functions in bridge deck aeroelasticity , 2006 .

[27]  La Foye,et al.  Calcul de la réponse dynamique des structures élancées à la turbulence du vent , 2001 .

[28]  Robert H. Scanlan,et al.  Reexamination of sectional aerodynamic force functions for bridges , 2001 .

[29]  A. Kareem,et al.  TIME DOMAIN FLUTTER AND BUFFETING RESPONSE ANALYSIS OF BRIDGES , 1999 .