Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

IABSE Task Group 3.1 Benchmark Results. Part 2: Numerical Analysis of a Three-Degree-of-Freedom Bridge Deck Section Based on Experimental Aerodynamics

  • Giorgio Diana
  • , Stoyan Stoyanoff
  • , Ketil Aas-Jakobsen
  • , Andrew Allsop
  • , Michael Andersen
  • , Tommaso Argentini
  • , Miguel Cid Montoya
  • , Santiago Hernández
  • , José Ángel Jurado
  • , Hiroshi Katsuchi
  • , Igor Kavrakov
  • , Ho Kyung Kim
  • , Guy Larose
  • , Allan Larsen
  • , Guido Morgenthal
  • , Ole Øiseth
  • , Simone Omarini
  • , Daniele Rocchi
  • , Martin Svendsen
  • , Teng Wu
  • Polytechnic University of Milan
  • Rowan Williams Davies and Irwin Inc.
  • Ing. A. Aas-Jakobsen AS
  • Arup Group
  • Svend Ole Hansen ApS
  • University of A Coruna
  • Yokohama National University
  • Bauhaus-Universität Weimar
  • Seoul National University
  • COWI A/S
  • Norwegian University of Science and Technology
  • Ramboll Foundation

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

26 Scopus citations

Abstract

IABSE Task Group 3.1 has the mandate to define reference results for the validation of methodologies and programs used to study both stability and buffeting responses of long-span bridges. To this end, the working group set up a benchmark procedure consisting of several steps with increasing complexity to define reference results useful for this validation. The simplest step (1.1a) was presented in Part 1. In this paper (Part 2), the contributions and reference results of the second sub-step (1.1c) are discussed. It consists of the simulation of the aeroelastic response of a three-degree-of-freedom bridge deck section forced by turbulent wind, using experimental aerodynamic coefficients measured in a wind tunnel. The increase in complexity, compared to the previous step, involves the experimental definition of unsteady force coefficients that are defined in a limited range of reduced velocities, and inclusion of the lateral motion and horizontal turbulent wind velocity components. Comparison of the different outputs, obtained by Task Group 3.1 participants with the same input data, is presented, revealing differences that are not always negligible. Moreover, the increase in complexity of the test case results in larger spreads of the results compared to the fully analytical case, analysed in Part 1.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)411-420
Number of pages10
JournalStructural Engineering International
Volume30
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2 2020

Keywords

  • aeroelasticity
  • Benchmark
  • buffeting
  • flutter
  • long-span bridge
  • validation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'IABSE Task Group 3.1 Benchmark Results. Part 2: Numerical Analysis of a Three-Degree-of-Freedom Bridge Deck Section Based on Experimental Aerodynamics'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this