Improvements in Convergence Robustness with a 2D–3DOF Method: Application of Genetic Algorithm to Coupled Flutter
Publication: Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 27, Issue 10
Abstract
To overcome nonconvergence in the two-dimensional–three degrees of freedom (2D–3DOF) method, the practical modal-driven flutter analysis method (PMDFA) was proposed for the coupled flutter in long span bridges that used a genetic algorithm (GA). First, formulas in the 2D–3DOF method were updated when the assumed initial displacement was expressed as an exponential form for the frequency and damping. Then, the calculation results from the modified formulas proved to be identical to the exact solution that was calculated by the complex eigenvalue analysis (CEVA). However, due to the inherent defects in the iterative equations, the original fixed-point method (FPM) failed to converge when the frequencies of heaving and torsion were close. To overcome the convergence limitations in the FPM, a powerful GA without the restrictions of the iterative equation properties was introduced into the revised 2D–3DOF method. Then, the flutter analysis of suspension bridges with a main span from 1,000 to 5,000 m was carried out, and the numerical calculation showed that the FPM failed to complete the flutter calculation in most cases; however, the GA performed the analysis. In addition, a study on a suspension bridge showed that the numerical results obtained by the PMDFA were in reasonable agreement with the experimental results. Therefore, the proposed GA-based method has advantages of high accuracy and strong robustness and has wider application prospects in the flutter analysis of super long span bridges.
Practical Applications
Flutter instability can cause a large amplitude vibration and destroy a structure completely and it must be avoided during the service life of a structure. With an increase in the span, flutter performance has become an important index in the wind resistance design of long span bridges. The 2D–3DOF method can evaluate the flutter performance of structures effectively and establish a deep understanding between aerodynamic parameters and aerodynamic performance. Therefore, it plays an important role in the analysis of the flutter mechanism. However, due to the defect in the original convergence algorithm, sometimes it cannot calculate Ucraccurately in practical engineering applications. Therefore, to overcome this problem, a GA was introduced into this paper to calculate convergence. The case study showed that the proposed GA-based method has the advantages of high accuracy and strong robustness, and could deal with the problem perfectly. In addition, the iteration problem of nonconvergence might occur in the other methods, such as the CEVA or the multimodal flutter analysis and the solution idea in this paper might have a certain reference value for the convergence calculation.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The research described in this paper is financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 52178503), and the Ministry of Science and Technology of China (Grant No. SLDRCE19-B-10). Thanks to the assistant professors Fang G. S. and Cui W. for their help in improving the writing.
References
Burden, R. L., and J. D. Faires. 2010. Numerical analysis, 9th ed. Boston, MA: Brooks/Cole.
Chen, X. 2007. “Improved understanding of bimodal coupled bridge flutter based on closed-form solutions.” J. Struct. Eng. 133 (1): 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2007)133:1(22).
Chen, X., and A. Kareem. 2006. “Revisiting multimode coupled bridge flutter: Some new insights.” J. Eng. Mech. 132 (10): 1115–1123. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2006)132:10(1115).
Coley, D. A. 1999. Introduction to genetic algorithms for scientists and engineers. Singapore: World Scientific.
Corana, A., M. Marchesi, C. Martini, and S. Ridella. 1987. “Minimizing multimodal functions of continuous variables with the “simulated annealing” algorithm—Corrigenda for this article is available here.” ACM Trans. Math. Software 13 (3): 262–280. https://doi.org/10.1145/29380.29864.
Fang, G. S., W. Pang, L. Zhao, P. Rawal, S. Y. Cao, and Y. J. Ge. 2021. “Toward a refined estimation of typhoon wind hazards: Parametric modeling and upstream terrain effects.” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 209: 104460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2020.104460.
Fang, G. S., W. Pang, L. Zhao, K. Xu, S. Y. Cao, and Y. J. Ge. 2022. “Tropical-cyclone-wind-induced flutter failure analysis of long-span bridges.” Eng. Fail. Anal. 132: 105933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2021.105933.
Gaafar, L. K., and S. A. Masoud. 2005. “Genetic algorithms and simulated annealing for scheduling in agile manufacturing.” Int. J. Prod. Res. 43 (14): 3069–3085. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540412331333414.
Kennedy, J., and R. Eberhart. 1995. “Particle swarm optimization.” In Proc., 1995 IEEE Int. Conf. on Neural Networks, 1942–1948. Perth, Australia: IEEE Service Center.
Larose, G. L., and F. M. Livesey. 1997. “Performance of streamlined bridge decks in relation to the aerodynamics of a flat plate.” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 69–71 (1): 851–860. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(97)00211-0.
Matsumoto, M., Y. Kobayashi, and H. Shirato. 1996. “The influence of aerodynamic derivatives on flutter.” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 60: 227–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(96)00036-0.
Matsumoto, M., H. Matsumiya, S. Fujiwara, and Y. Ito. 2010. “New consideration on flutter properties based on step-by-step analysis.” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 98 (8–9): 429–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2010.02.001.
Matsumoto, M., K. Mizuno, K. Okubo, Y. Ito, and H. Matsumiya. 2007. “Flutter instability and recent development in stabilization of structures.” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 95 (9–11): 888–907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2007.01.015.
Matsumoto, M., N. Nakajima, Y. Taniwaki, and R. Shijo. 2001. “Grating effect on flutter instability.” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 89 (14–15): 1487–1497. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(01)00143-X.
Matsumoto, M., K. Okubo, Y. Ito, H. Matsumiya, and G. Kim. 2008. “The complex branch characteristics of coupled flutter.” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 96 (10–11): 1843–1855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2008.02.011.
Matsumoto, M., F. Yoshizumi, Y. Ichikawa, and T. Yabutani. 1997. “Torsional flutter of bluff bodies.” J. Eng. Mech. 69–71: 871–882.
Matsumoto, M., F. Yoshizumi, T. Yabutani, K. Abe, and N. Nakajima. 1999. “Flutter stabilization and heaving-branch flutter.” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 83 (1–3): 289–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(99)00079-3.
Namini, A., P. Albrecht, and H. Bosch. 1992. “Finite element-based flutter analysis of cable-suspended bridges.” J. Struct. Eng. 118 (6): 1509–1526. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1992)118:6(1509).
Nijhout, F. 1997. “An introduction to genetic algorithms.” Complexity 2 (5): 39–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0526(199705/06)2:5%3C39::AID-CPLX8%3E3.0.CO;2-L.
Ramos, H., and M. T. T. Monteiro. 2017. “A new approach based on the Newton’s method to solve systems of nonlinear equations.” J. Comput. Appl. Math. 318: 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2016.12.019.
Scanlan, R. H., and J. J. Tomko. 1971. “Airfoil and bridge deck flutter derivatives.” J. Eng. Mech. Div. 97 (6): 1717–1737. https://doi.org/10.1061/JMCEA3.0001526.
Shao, Y. H., G. E. Yao-Jun, K. E. Shi-Tang, and Y. X. Yang. 2012. “Theoretical research on the aerodynamic stability of super-long span suspension bridge with a main span of 5000 m.” J. Exp. Fluid Mech. 25 (6): 38–44.
Theodorsen, T. 1935. General theory of aerodynamic instability and the mechanism of flutter, 413–433. NACA-TR-496. Langley Field, VA: National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. Langley Aeronautical Laboratory.
Wilde, K., Fujino, Y., Masukawa, J., 1996. “Time domain modeling of bridge deck flutter.” Struct. Eng. Earthquake Eng. 13 (2): 93–104.
Yang, Y., Y. Ge, and H. Xiang. 2007. “Investigation on flutter mechanism of long-span bridges with 2d-3DOF method.” Wind Struct. 10 (5): 421–435. https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2007.10.5.421.
Yang, Y., Y. Ge, R. Zhou, S. Chen, and L. Zhang. 2020. “Aerodynamic countermeasure schemes of super long-span suspension bridges with various aspect ratios.” Int. J. Struct. Stab. Dyn. 20 (5): 2050061.
Yang, Y., R. Zhou, Y. Ge, D. Mohotti, and P. Mendis. 2015. “Aerodynamic instability performance of twin box girders for long-span bridges.” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 145: 196–208.
Yang, Y., R. Zhou, Y. Ge, and L. Zhang. 2018. “Flutter characteristics of thin plate sections for aerodynamic bridges.” J. Bridge Eng. 23 (1): 04017121. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001165.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2022 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Dec 22, 2021
Accepted: May 27, 2022
Published online: Aug 3, 2022
Published in print: Oct 1, 2022
Discussion open until: Jan 3, 2023
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
Cited by
- Yongxin Yang, Jinbo Zhu, Lizhu Hong, Yaojun Ge, Rushen Su, Huchen Yang, Rui Zhou, Effect Mechanism of Wind Barriers on Flutter Characteristics of Closed Box Girders with Different Aspect Ratios, Journal of Bridge Engineering, 10.1061/JBENF2.BEENG-6079, 28, 9, (2023).