Narrow Results

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.

In this study, the influences of wind barriers on the aerodynamic characteristics of trains (e.g. a CRH2 train) on a highway-railway one-story bridge were investigated by using wind pressure measurement tests, and a reduction factor of overturning moment coefficients was analyzed for trains under wind barriers. Subsequently, based on a joint simulation employing SIMPACK and ANSYS, a wind–train–track–bridge system coupled vibration model was established, and the safety and comfort indexes of trains on the bridge were studied under different wind barrier parameters. The results show that the mean wind pressures and fluctuating wind pressures on the trains’ surface decrease generally if wind barriers are used. As a result, the dynamic responses of the trains also decrease in the whole process of crossing the bridge. Of particular note, the rate of the wheel load reductions and lateral wheel-axle forces can change from unsafe states to relative safe states due to the wind barriers. The influence of the porosity of the wind barriers on the mean wind pressures and fluctuating wind pressures on the windward sides and near the top corner surfaces of the trains are significantly greater than the influence from the height of the wind barriers. Within a certain range, decreasing the wind barrier porosities and increasing the wind barrier heights will significantly reduce the safety and comfort index values of trains on the bridge. It is found that when the porosity of the wind barrier is 40%, the optimal height of the wind barrier is determined as approximately 3.5m. At this height, the trains on the bridges are safer and run more smoothly and comfortably. Besides, through the dynamic response analysis of the wind–train–track–bridge system, it is found that the installation of wind barriers in cases with high wind speeds (30m/s) may have an adverse effect on the vertical vibration of the train–track–bridge system.