Embed Doc
Copy Link
Readcast
Collections

1
CommentGo Back

Download

Dynamic Wind Effects on Bridges

Prem Krishna

Professor of Bridge Engineering Department of Civil Engineering, University of Roorkee, Roorkee-247667 wincen@rurkiu.ernet.in; civil@rurkiu.ernet.in

Abstract

Wind being a randomly varying time-dependent phenomenon evokes a dynamic response from structures exposed to it. It is convenient to consider the wind loading to consist of a quasi-static(mean) and a dynamic (fluctuating) component. Bridge structures can range in span from a fewmeters to a couple of kilometers and their structural arrangement as well as sensitivity to the dynamicaction of wind is dependent thereon. Long span bridges are generally cable bridges and their inherent flexibility makes them vulnerable to aerodynamic oscillations of different nature. The paper concentrates mainly on the issues concerning the aerodynamic response and design of such bridges tomake them safe and stable under wind action.

INTRODUCTION

Wind is essentially a dynamic, randomly varying time-dependent force, and thus alwaysevokes a dynamic response from a structure. The degree, however, varies with the type of structure and all the accompanying variations of the situation; likewise is the case with bridges.Any record of wind shows that its velocity, V, at a point varies with time. It is convenient tolook at this as consisting of a mean plus a fluctuating component, such that,

V,VVV

′+=

being the mean component and V' the fluctuating component. Both thesecomponents vary with height, as shown in Fig. 1. Another factor that affects the windvelocity at a certain location, besides the height above ground, is the nature of the approachterrain. Fig. 2 depicts typical velocity profiles for wind as it may approach bridges. It is alsoseen as to how the of surface roughness may affect the profile.

14pt. or 1 enter 14ptBold Title case12pt. or 1 enter 12pt bold Title case

10pt.italicsnormal20pt. or 2 enter 12pt.italics bold10pt.10pt italics11pt. space1st level heading — 11pt.bold all caps11pt. normal text11pt. space

3 cms top drop only for first page

Page setupTop 5.85 cmBottom 5.65 cmLeft 3.25 cmRight 3.25Gutter, 0Header 4.85Footer – 4.85

The mean force, F, on a surface acted upon by wind can be expressed as,F =Cp

A (1)where p = 1/2

= mass density of air,V = wind velocity,Cp = pressure coefficient,

and A = reference area of exposureThe effect of gustiness of wind can be accounted for by using a 'gust' factor on F. The valueof the 'gust' factor depends upon the averaging period used for getting the mean windvelocity V. Typically, if a 15 min period is used for averaging, the peak gust speed is (1+gI)times the mean speed. Here, g is a statistical factor of the order 3 and I, the intensity of turbulence. The gust factor will be (1+gI)

. If, for evaluating F, the gust wind speed is usedin place of



V, the effect of gustiness is accounted for directly. The approach is satisfactoryfor small structures, which do not have a tendency to oscillate. For larger, more sensitivestructures, the mean forces and the dynamic forces are usually not related in such a simpleway, since the distribution of the two types of forces may be quite different. Whether one pursues a theoretical or an experimental approach, the determination of the mean componentis more straightforward as compared to the dynamic component.Whereas, generally it is sufficient to deal with the horizontal component of wind onstructures, in case of bridges the inclination of wind incidence in the vertical plane becomesimportant. Such inclination results in wind velocity having a vertical component whichaffects the 'force' coefficients as seen later in this paper. (Fig. 5)

BRIDGE RESPONSE

Short to medium span bridges can be assessed with methods for determining quasi-staticwind effects, whereas long (or super-long) span bridges necessarily exhibit a markeddynamic behaviour. Girder, truss and arch bridges generally fall into the first category, and,cable bridges, being inherently flexible, by and large are in the latter category. Whereasfailure of shorter bridges in high wind storms is not unknown, there are examples of anumber of early suspension bridges (Table 1) having got damaged or failed during windstorms - the failure of the Tacoma Narrows bridge in 1940 under moderate wind is the moststriking example of this type.

11pt. space

11pt. spaceindent 1.5 cms11pt. space11pt. space11pt. space11pt. space11pt.bold all caps

One important factor governing bridge response is the energy spectrum of the approachwind. In this respect it is interesting to note that the influence of the approach site on thewind can manifest quite dramatically. There are examples of many suspension bridges whichexhibited unusual aerodynamic behaviour, which could be explained by the environmentalsituation surrounding the bridge. Some of these are, Menai Straits bridge, Clifton bridge,Roebling bridge, Halifax bridge, Tacoma Narrows bridge, The Golden Gate bridge, BronxWhitestone bridge, Normandy bridge (Miyata, 1999). Many long span bridges have siteswith peculiarities and it follows thus that attention must be given to this aspect. Perhaps the best course is to study these situations through wind tunnel testing, as was done, for example, for the Tatara Cable Stayed Bridge in Japan.The behaviour of bridges which are wind sensitive may be broken down broadly into'static' and 'dynamic' categories. Static response can be best seen in terms of the forcecoefficients C

, C

and C

, representing drag, lift and pitching moment respectively,which are to a great extent dependent upon the shape of the deck as well as the angle of incidence of wind (measured in the vertical plane). Fig. 3 shows typical trussed andstreamlined box cross sections for a cable bridge where the wind drag for the former can be as much as three times the latter. Fig. 4 depicts the effect of shaping the box on thedrag coefficient and Fig. 5 the values of force coefficients for two long suspension bridges, as affected by the angle of incidence of wind.The dynamic behaviour of the bridge under the action of wind loads is dependent upon theflow; particularly in terms of the turbulence characteristics, and the structural as well asaerodynamic characteristics - the mass, stiffness, frequency, geometrical shape and damping.These characteristics are often related to the bridge form and span. For example, see Figs. 6and 7 for suspension and cable stayed bridge frequencies of vibration-it is noteworthy thatthe frequencies for truss or arch bridges would be in the order of 1/2 - 1 Hz. The variousforms of aerodynamic response can be described as - buffeting, vortex induced oscillations,and, self excited oscillations such as in vertical bending, torsional bending, galloping intowers, or, flutter. It is seen from Figs. 8 and 9 that there is a sharp increase in the span rangeof cable bridges, and consequently issues of aerodynamic response are going to assumegreater significance.|

The preceding discussion is making it obvious that there is a close link between bridgeaerodynamics and the Cable Bridge form. It is best, therefore, to proceed by studying the problem in terms of the three major components in a cable bridge superstructure - the deck,towers and cables.|

The Deck

The deck is the most important component of a bridge from the standpoint of the aodynamic behaviour of a cable bridge, and is therefore the one most investigated. Initially cable bridges

11pt. space11pt. space11pt. space11pt. space2

level heading —11pt. bold- below no space