Finite Element‐Based Flutter Analysis of Cable‐Suspended Bridges
Publication: Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 118, Issue 6
Abstract
In this paper, an approach to computational flutter analysis is presented, which permits the determination of the critical wind velocity that initiates damping‐ and stiffness‐driven flutter of cable‐suspended bridges. Dynamic response may be coupled elastically and/or aerodynamically, with the developed algorithm, the so‐called pK‐F method determining the preflutter and postflutter responses by solution to the modal equations of motion. The entire method is presented in matrix form, so as to be easily implemented into finite element systems. As an example, the pK‐F method is applied to the Luling cable‐stayed bridge, which was experimentally tested for flutter in the wind tunnel. Also, examples are provided for flutter determination with different deck sections. The pK‐F method has proved reliable in its methodology and efficient in its use. The generality of the method permits more flutter scenarios to be examined, including construction stages and different flutter derivatives for different portions of the bridge structure.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Bathe, K. J. (1982). Finite element procedures in engineering analysis. Prentice‐Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
2.
Bosch, H. R. (1977). “Aerodynamic investigations of the Luling, Louisiana cable‐stayed bridge.” Report No. FHWA‐RD‐77‐161, Federal Highway Administration, Offices of Res. and Development, Washington, D.C.
3.
Hassig, H. L. (1971). “An approximate true damping solution of the flutter equation by determinant iteration.” J. Aircr., 11(8), 876–880.
4.
Namini, A. H. (1990). “Microcomputer‐based extraction of cable‐stayed bridge natural modes.” Proc., Forth Rail Bridge Centenary Conf., 1, 499–510.
5.
Scanlan, R. H. (1975). “Recent methods in the application of test results to the wind design of long, suspended‐span bridges.” Report No. FHWA‐RD‐75‐115, Federal Highway Administration, Offices of Res. and Development, Washington, D.C.
6.
Scanlan, R. H. (1978). “The action of flexible bridges under wind, Part I.” J. Sound Vib., 60(2), 187–199.
7.
Scanlan, R. H. (1981). “State‐of‐the‐art methods for calculating flutter, vortex‐induced, and buffeting response of bridge structures.” Report No. FHWA/RD‐80/50, Federal Highway Administration Offices of Res. and Development, Washington, D.C.
8.
Scanlan, R. H. (1987). “Interpreting aeroelastic models of cable‐stayed bridges.” J. Engrg. Mech., ASCE, 113(4), 555–575.
9.
Scanlan, R. H., and Jones, N. P. (1990). “Aeroelastic analysis of cable‐stayed bridges.” J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 116(2), 279–297.
10.
Scanlan, R. H., and Tomko, J. J. (1971). “Airfoil and bridge deck flutter derivatives.” J. Engrg. Mech. Div., ASCE, 97(6), 1717–1737.
11.
Theodorsen, T. (1934). “General theory of aerodynamic instability and the mechanism of flutter.” NACA Report No. 496, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 118 • Issue 6 • June 1992
Pages: 1509 - 1526
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 ASCE.
History
Published online: Jun 1, 1992
Published in print: Jun 1992
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.