4.5 Article

Aerodynamic Stabilization Mechanism of a Twin Box Girder with Various Slot Widths

期刊

JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING
卷 20, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000645

关键词

Twin box bridge; Deck slot; Flutter; Aerodynamic stabilization; Modified Selberg formula; Two-dimensional three degrees of freedom (2D-3DOF)

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China [51078276]
  2. U.S. National Science Foundation [CMMI 09-28282]
  3. Ministry of Transportation [KLWRBMT-04]
  4. Ministry of Science and Technology [SLDRCE 10-B-05]
  5. State Key Lab for Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering [SLDRCE13-MB-02]
  6. Directorate For Engineering
  7. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn [928282] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Five representative girder cross sections with various slot widths are utilized to analyze the effects of center slots on their aerodynamic performance, based on wind-tunnel tests and theoretical analyses. It is shown that the favorable aerodynamic effects of the center slot on bridge decks depend on the aerodynamic shape of the box girders and on the slot widths rather than unconditionally improving the aeroelastic stability. Further investigation of a streamlined box girder with various slot widths results in a modified Selberg formula to calculate the critical flutter wind speed for design purposes, wherein the Lorentz peak-value function is utilized. The flutter mechanism is illustrated utilizing a two-dimensional three-degrees-of-freedom (2D-3DOF) analysis scheme. The results indicate that the center slot changes the participation level of the heaving motion at the flutter onset, which is highly correlated with the critical flutter wind speed. In addition, particle image velocimetry (PIV) and proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) techniques are employed to assist in revealing the aerodynamic stabilization mechanism of the center slotting of box girders. (C) 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.

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

4.5
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