3.8 Article

Capability analysis of computational fluid dynamics models in wind shield study on Queensferry Crossing, Scotland

出版社

ICE PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1680/jbren.21.00095

关键词

bridges; computational fluid dynamics; wind loading & aerodynamics; wind shield; wind tunnel test

资金

  1. University College Dublin [201908300012]
  2. China Scholarship Council [201908300012]
  3. Transport Scotland
  4. Arup Consulting Engineers
  5. Irish Centre for High-End Computing (ICHEC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, 3D CFD models were developed to investigate the aerodynamic behavior of Queensferry Crossing. The models were validated and showed similar accuracy to wind tunnel tests in determining the aerodynamic coefficients.
Bridge aerodynamic studies are essential in ensuring the safety and acceptable performance of long-span bridges vulnerable to the effects of cross-winds. Aerodynamic studies were traditionally carried out in wind tunnel facilities, but there are now greater opportunities for using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modelling. Few three-dimensional (3D) aerodynamic simulations of lightweight vehicles on bridges exist, but limited validation and verification work has been carried out. In the study reported in this paper, 3D CFD models were developed for Queensferry Crossing - a cable-stayed bridge in Scotland - containing wind shields and sample vehicles. The models considered the wind effects from a range of yaw wind angles and subsequently determined the aerodynamic coefficients of vehicles. The models were verified by means of a mesh sensitivity study, a domain sensitivity study and comparisons with wind tunnel tests. The models were then validated using the same modelling process but with a different type of wind shield and again comparing the results with wind tunnel test data for the same configuration. The results showed that CFD modelling can determine aerodynamic coefficients to a level of accuracy similar to that of wind tunnel tests.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据