No Access

Aerodynamic Countermeasure Schemes of Super Long-Span Suspension Bridges with Various Aspect Ratios

Yongxin Yang

State Key Lab for Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, P. R. China

Search for more papers by this author

Yaojun Ge

State Key Lab for Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, P. R. China

Search for more papers by this author

Rui Zhou

Institute of Urban Smart Transportation & Safety Maintenance, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, P. R. China

E-mail Address: zhourui@szu.edu.cn

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

Shiguo Chen

State Key Lab for Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, P. R. China

Search for more papers by this author

, and

Lihai Zhang

Department of Infrastructure Engineering, University of Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219455420500613Cited by:23 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the flutter control scheme of super long-span bridges with various aspect ratios (e.g. width to height (B/H)) using passive aerodynamic countermeasures. Through a series of wind tunnel testing and theoretical analysis, three types of passive aerodynamic countermeasures, i.e. vertical central stabilizer (VCS), wind barrier and inspection rail, were investigated for five typical aspect ratios of a closed-box girder bridge. The results show that both the aspect ratio and flutter critical wind speed generally increase with the decrease of the ratio of torsional and vertical frequencies of the bridge. In the case of an aspect ratio of 8.9, a downward VCS (DVCS) has a much better flutter performance than that of an upward VCS (UVCS) because aerodynamic damping of Part A and Part D could produce a higher heaving degree of freedom (DOF) participation level. Furthermore, the position variation of wind barriers is superior to their shape variation for the bridge with an aspect ratio of 8.3, and the flutter performance of the girder with a combination of the wind barrier (WB3P3) and UDVCS with 0.3h/H DVCS appears to be better than that without countermeasures. In addition, the installation of an inspection rail near the bottom point of an inclined-web (IR3) has the best flutter control effect among four positions of inspection rails.

Keywords:

Remember to check out the Most Cited Articles!
Remember to check out the structures

References

1. F. Ricciardelli, E. T. de Grenet and H. Hangan , Pressure distribution, aerodynamic forces and dynamic response of box bridge Sections, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 90 (2002) 1135–1150. Web of Science, Google Scholar
2. H. Wang, T. Guo, T. Y. Tao and A. Q. Li , Study on wind characteristics of Runyang suspension bridge based on long-term monitored data, Int. J. Struct. Stabil. Dyn. 16(4) (2016) 1640019. Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
3. R. Zhou, Y. X. Yang, L. H. Zhang and Y. J. Ge , Interference effect on stationary aerodynamic performance between parallel bridges, Int. J. Struct. Stabil. Dyn. 17(2) (2017) 1750017-1–1750017-23. Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
4. K. Xu, Y. Ge, L. Zhao and X. Du , Experimental and numerical study on the dynamic stability of vortex-induced vibration of bridge decks, Int. J. Struct. Stabil. Dyn. 18(3) (2018) 1850033. Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
5. Y. B. Yang, F. Xiong, Z. L. Wang and H. Xu , Extraction of bridge frequencies inclusive of the higher modes by the ESMD using the contact-point response, Int. J. Struct. Stabil. Dyn. (2020) 2050045, https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219455420500455. Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
6. S. Shirai and T. Ueda , Aerodynamic simulation by CFD on flat box girder of super-long-span suspension bridge, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 279–290. Web of Science, Google Scholar
7. M. W. Sarwar et al., Prediction of aerodynamic characteristics of a box girder bridge Section using the les turbulence model, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 96 (2008) 1895–1911. Web of Science, Google Scholar
8. D. H. Phan . Passive winglet control of flutter and buffeting responses of suspension bridges, Int. J. Struct. Stabil. Dyn. 18(5) (2018) 1850072. Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
9. K. Wilde, Y. Fujino and T. Kawakami , Analytical and experimental study on passive aerodynamic control of flutter of a bridge deck, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 80 (1999) 105–119. Web of Science, Google Scholar
10. Y. B. Yang, S. V. Mac and C. H. Chen , Multi-mode coupled buffeting analysis of cable-stayed bridges, Int. J. Struct. Stabil. Dyn. 1(3) (2001) 429–453. Link, Google Scholar
11. R. Zhou et al., Practical countermeasures for the aerodynamic performance of long span cable-stayed bridge with open deck, Wind Struct. 21(2) (2015) 223–229. Web of Science, Google Scholar
12. A. Larsen and A. Wall , Shaping of bridge box girders to avoid vortex shedding response, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 104 (2012) 159–165. Web of Science, Google Scholar
13. Y. X. Yang et al., Flutter characteristics of twin-box girder bridges with vertical central stabilizers, Eng. Struct. 133 (2017) 33–48. Web of Science, Google Scholar
14. Y. Zhou, Y. Q. Li and A. Yoshida . Effect of added mass on wind-induced vibration of a circular flat membrane by wind tunnel tests, Int. J. Struct. Stabil. Dyn. 18(12) (2018) 1850156. Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
15. Y. X. Yang et al., Sensitivity analysis of geometrical parameters on aerodynamic performance of closed-box girder bridges, Sensors 18(7) (2018) 2053. Web of Science, Google Scholar
16. X. He et al., Effects of geometrical parameters on the aerodynamic characteristics of a streamlined flat box girder, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 170 (2017) 56–67. Web of Science, Google Scholar
17. B. Blenkiewiez , Wind-tunnel study of effects of geometry modification on aerodynamics of a cable-stayed bridge deck, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 26 (1987) 325–339. Web of Science, Google Scholar
18. M. G. Liu and Z. Q. Chen , Aerodynamic performance of H-section hangers with different sectional parameters, Eng Mech 30(5) (2013) 221–226. (In Chinese). Google Scholar
19. D. Gu and H. C. Lim , Wind flow around rectangular obstacles and the effects of aspect ratio, in Proc. BBAA7 (2012) Shanghai, China. Google Scholar
20. D. H. Yu et al., Simulation of the influence of aspect ratio on the aerodynamics of rectangular prisms, J. Eng. Mech. 139(4) (2013) 429–438. Web of Science, Google Scholar
21. A. R. Chen, Z. Z. Zhou and H. F. Xiang , On the mechanism of vertical stabilizer plates for improving aerodynamic stability of bridges, Wind Struct. 9(1) (2016) 59–74. Web of Science, Google Scholar
22. Y. X. Yang et al., Experimental studies on VIV performance and countermeasures for twin-box girder bridges with various slot width ratios, J. Fluids Struct. 66 (2016) 476–489. Web of Science, Google Scholar
23. A. Larsen , Aerodynamic Aspects of the final design of the 1624m suspension bridge across the great belt, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 48(2/3) (1993) 261–285. Web of Science, Google Scholar
24. W. M. Zhang, Y. X. Yang, Y. J. Ge and Y. H. Shao , Effects of wind barrier on wind-resistant performance of long-span suspension bridge, J. Wuhan Univ. Technol. 30(11) (2008) 113–116. (In Chinese) Google Scholar
25. J. L. Xia et al., Crosswind environment and flutter performances of bridge deck with different wind barriers, J. Harbin Inst. Technol. 49(3) (2017) 98–105. (In Chinese) Google Scholar
26. M. S. Andersen, J. Johansson, A. Brandt and S. O. Hansen , Aerodynamic stability of long span suspension bridges with low torsional natural frequencies, Eng. Struct. 120(1) (2016) 82–91. Web of Science, Google Scholar
27. Ministry of Communications of the People’s Republic of China. JTG/T 3360-01-2018 Wind-resistant Design Specification for Highway Bridges (China Communications Press, Beijing, China, 2018). Google Scholar
28. R. H. Scanlan and J. J. Tomko , Airfoil and bridge deck flutter derivatives, J. Eng. Mech. 97(6) (1971) 1717–1737. Google Scholar
29. T. Janesupasaeree and V. Boonyapinyo , Determination of flutter derivatives of bridge decks by covariance-driven stochastic subspace identification, Int. J. Struct. Stabil. Dyn. 11(1) (2011) 73–99. Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
30. Q. Wang, H. L. Liao, M. S. Li and C. M. Ma , Influence of aerodynamic shape of streamline box girder on bridge flutter and vortex-induced vibration, J. Highw. Transp. Res. Dev. 29 (2012) 44–50. (In Chinese). Google Scholar