Wind and Structures

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

New estimation methodology of six complex aerodynamic admittance functions

  • Han, Y. (Wind Engineering Research Center, College of Civil Engineering, Hunan University) ;
  • Chen, Z.Q. (Wind Engineering Research Center, College of Civil Engineering, Hunan University) ;
  • Hua, X.G. (Wind Engineering Research Center, College of Civil Engineering, Hunan University)
  • Received : 2009.01.07
  • Accepted : 2010.02.03
  • Published : 2010.05.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper describes a new method for the estimation of six complex aerodynamic admittance functions. The aerodynamic admittance functions relate buffeting forces to the incoming wind turbulent components, of which the estimation accuracy affects the prediction accuracy of the buffeting response of long-span bridges. There should be two aerodynamic admittance functions corresponding to the longitudinal and vertical turbulent components, respectively, for each gust buffeting force. Therefore, there are six aerodynamic admittance functions in all for the three buffeting forces. Sears function is a complex theoretical expression for the aerodynamic admittance function for a thin airfoil. Similarly, the aerodynamic admittance functions for a bridge deck should also be complex functions. This paper presents a separated frequency-by-frequency method for estimating the six complex aerodynamic admittance functions. A new experimental methodology using an active turbulence generator is developed to measure simultaneously all the six complex aerodynamic admittance functions. Wind tunnel tests of a thin plate model and a streamlined bridge section model are conducted in turbulent flow. The six complex aerodynamic admittance functions, determined by the developed methodology are compared with the Sears functions and Davenport's formula.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : National Science Foundation of China

References

  1. Chen, X. and Kareem, A. (2002), "Advances in modeling aerodynamic forces on bridge decks", J. Eng. Mech.-ASCE, 128(11), 1193-1205. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2002)128:11(1193)
  2. Davenport, A.G. (1962), "Buffeting of a suspension bridge by storm winds", J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 88(3), 233-268.
  3. $Deno\ddot{e}l$, V. and $Deg\acute{e}e$, H. (2006), "Influence of the non-linearity of the aerodynamic coefficients on the skewness of the buffeting drag force", Wind Struct., 6, 457-471.
  4. Diana, G., Bruni, S., Cigada, A. and Zappa, E. (2002), "Complex aerodynamic admittance function role in buffeting response of a bridge deck", J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod., 90, 2057-2072. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(02)00321-5
  5. Diana, G., Resta, F., Zasso, A., Belloli, M. and Rocchi, R. (2004), "Forced motion and free motion aeroelastic tests on a new-concept dynamometric section model of the Messina suspension bridges", J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod., 92, 441-462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2004.01.005
  6. Han, Y. (2007), Study on complex aerodynamic admittance functions and refined analysis of buffeting response of bridges, Ph.D. Thesis, College of Civil Engineering, Hunan University, China. (In Chinese).
  7. Hatanaka, A. and Tanaka, H. (2002), "New estimation method of aerodynamic admittance function", J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod., 90, 2073-2086. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(02)00324-0
  8. Hatanaka, A. and Tanaka, H. (2008), "Aerodynamic admittance functions of rectangular cylinders", J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod., 96, 945-953.
  9. Jancauskas, E.D. and Melbourne, W.H. (1986), "The aerodynamic admittance of two-dimensional rectangular section cylinders in smooth flow", J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod., 23, 395-408. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(86)90057-7
  10. Kawatani, M. and Kim, H. (1992), "Evaluation of aerodynamic admittance for buffeting analysis", J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod., 41-44, 613-624.
  11. Larose, G.L. and Livesey, F.M. (1997), "Performance of streamlined bridge decks in relation to the aerodynamics of a thin plate", J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod., 69-71, 851-860. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(97)00211-0
  12. Larose, G.L. and Mann, J. (1998), "Gust loading on streamlined bridge decks", J. Fluid. Struct., 12, 511-536. https://doi.org/10.1006/jfls.1998.0161
  13. Larose, G.L., Tanaka, H., Gimsing, N.J. and Dyrbye, C. (1998), "Direct measurement of buffeting wind forces on bridge decks", J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod., 74-76, 809-818. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(98)00073-7
  14. Liepmann, H.W. (1952), "On the application of statistical concepts to the buffeting problem", J. Aeronaut. Sci., 19, 793-800. https://doi.org/10.2514/8.2491
  15. Mendes, P.A. and Branco, F.A. (2001), "Unbalanced wind buffeting efforts on bridges during double cantilever erection stages", Wind Struct., 4, 45-62. https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2001.4.1.045
  16. Sears, W.R. (1941), "Some aspects of non-stationary airfoil theory and its practical application", J. Aeronaut. Sci., 8, 104-108. https://doi.org/10.2514/8.10655
  17. Scanlan, R.H. (1993), "Problematics in formulation of wind-force model for bridge deck", J. Eng. Mech.-ASCE, 119, 1353-1375. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1993)119:7(1353)
  18. Scanlan, R.H. and Jones, N.P. (1999), "A form of aerodynamic admittance for use in bridge aeroelastic analysis", J. Fluid. Struct., 13, 1017-1027. https://doi.org/10.1006/jfls.1999.0243
  19. Scanlan, R.H. (2000), "Motion-related body-force functions in two-dimensional low-speed flow", J. Fluid. Struct., 14, 49-63. https://doi.org/10.1006/jfls.1999.0252
  20. Theodorsen, T. (1935), General theory of aerodynamic instability and the mechanism of flutter, NACA Report, No. 496, Langley: U.S. National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics.
  21. Tubino, F. (2005), "Relationships among aerodynamic admittance functions, flutter derivatives and static coefficients for long-span bridges", J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod., 93, 929-950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2005.09.002
  22. Zhou, Y. and Kareem, A. (2003), "Aerodynamic admittance functions of tall buildings", Proc. of the 11th Int. Conf. on Wind Engineering, June, Lubbock, TX.

Cited by

  1. Superposability of unsteady aerodynamic loads on bridge deck sections vol.20, pp.11, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-013-1845-8
  2. Identification of aerodynamic admittance functions of a flat closed-box deck in different grid-generated turbulent wind fields vol.21, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1177/1369433217718985
  3. Analysis on running safety of train on bridge with wind barriers subjected to cross wind vol.17, pp.2, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2013.17.2.203
  4. Wind loads and effects on rigid frame bridges with twin-legged high piers at erection stages vol.20, pp.10, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1177/1369433216684350
  5. Analysis on running safety of train on the bridge considering sudden change of wind load caused by wind barriers 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-017-0455-1
  6. Identification and application of six-component aerodynamic admittance functions of a closed-box bridge deck vol.172, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2017.11.002
  7. Aerodynamic admittances of bridge deck sections: Issues and wind field dependence vol.25, pp.3, 2010, https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2017.25.3.283
  8. Numerical simulation of wind turbulence by DSRFG and identification of the aerodynamic admittance of bridge decks vol.14, pp.1, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1080/19942060.2020.1844805
  9. Investigation on spanwise coherence of buffeting forces acting on bridges with bluff body decks vol.30, pp.2, 2010, https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2020.30.2.181
  10. Flow-conditioning of a subsonic wind tunnel to model boundary layer flows vol.30, pp.4, 2010, https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2020.30.4.339
  11. Gust Buffeting and Aerodynamic Admittance of Structures with Arbitrary Mode Shapes. I: Enhanced Equivalent Spectrum Technique vol.147, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)em.1943-7889.0001872