| Citation: | DUAN Qing-song, MA Cun-ming. Comparison of vertical vortex-induced vibration characteristics between semi-open girder and separated edge-boxes open girder[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2021, 21(4): 130-138. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2021.04.009
|
In recent years, the open composite beam section has been widely used in large-span bridges, such as Nanpu Bridge, Yangpu Bridge, Qingzhou Minjiang Bridge, etc. Compared with steel box girders, open composite beams fully utilize the advantages of both steel reinforcement and concrete; At the same time, the composite beam combines factory prefabrication and on-site cast-in-place, which can better leverage the advantages of prefabrication and cast-in-place, and is economically reasonable[1-2]According to the different forms of side box main beams, open section main beams can be divided into duplex beam open sections, separated side box open sections, and semi open sections. The main beam with an open form is a semi closed structure, consisting of a steel box main beam and a transverse partition. Compared to the main beam with a closed section, it is more blunt. This is mainly because the open position is more likely to cause significant separation of airflow on the lower side of the main beam, resulting in a series of vortex shedding and weakening the vortex vibration performance of the main beam. Most main beams with an open section have vortex induced resonance problems.
Currently, many scholars have conducted research on the vortex vibration performance of open cross-section main beams. Kubo et al[12]Analyzed the influence of the position and height of the edge main beam, wind angle of attack, etc. on the vortex vibration performance of the π - shaped section main beam, and analyzed in detail the unsteady pressure on the surface of the main beam through pressure measurement tests, elucidating the vibration suppression mechanism; Irwin[13]The vortex vibration performance of the open section of the edge main beam was studied through wind tunnel model tests. It was found that a wind barrier with a height of 3 meters and a ventilation rate of 50%, as well as a vertical stabilizing plate, can effectively suppress the vertical vortex vibration of the main beam. At the same time, the influence of factors such as turbulence degree and damping ratio was analyzed; Regarding the vortex vibration performance of the semi open main beam section, Zhu Ledong et al[14]Propose to install porous baffles on the outer edge of the main beam bottom plate to suppress vortex vibration; Zhang Zhitian and others[15-16]Segmental model tests were conducted on the vortex vibration performance of the main beam with an open cross-section of a duplex beam, and the influence of the lower stabilizing plate on the vortex vibration performance of the main beam was explored; Qian Guowei and others[17]Studied the influence of nozzle angle on the vortex vibration performance of open section main beams; Meng Xiaoliang and others[18]Comparing the vortex vibration characteristics of closed and semi closed steel box girders, it is believed that a sharper wind nozzle angle can improve the vortex vibration performance of the bridge; Zhan Qingliang and others[19]Experimental research was conducted on the vortex vibration characteristics of four types of open cross-section main beams; Duan Qingsong and others[20]The influence of wind attack angle, damping, and railing on the vortex vibration performance of the main beam of the separated side box was studied through wind tunnel model experiments; Fang Genshen and others[21]The vortex vibration performance of the semi open section main beam was tested through wind tunnel model tests and numerical simulations. It was found that the maintenance railing was the main cause of vortex vibration in the main beam, and corresponding vibration suppression measures were proposed; Wang et al[22]Experimental research was conducted on the vortex vibration performance of the main beam with an open cross-section of a left and right asymmetric separation side box, taking into account factors such as wind direction angle, wind attack angle, damping ratio, and vehicle.
| 参数 | 桥梁A | 桥梁B | ||
| 实桥 | 模型 | 实桥 | 模型 | |
| 主梁宽度B/m | 38.00 | 0.76 | 38.00 | 0.76 |
| 主梁高度H/m | 2.800 | 0.056 | 2.700 | 0.054 |
| 每延米等效质量m/(kg·m-1) | 41 911.000 | 16.706 | 61 875.000 | 24.554 |
| 每延米等效质量惯矩I/(kg·m2·m-1) | 3 505 138 | 0.561 | 6 748 829.000 | 1.080 |
| 竖向频率fv/Hz | 0.260 3 | 2.440 0 | 0.288 9 | 2.602 0 |
| 扭转频率ft/Hz | 0.466 | 4.300 | 0.700 | 6.372 |
DownLoad:
CSV
When the wind attack angles are 0 °, ± 3 °, and ± 5 °, the vertical vortex vibration performance of the two main beam sections is compared. The results are as follows:Figure 3As shown, where:UFor incoming wind speed;fvVertical frequency of the main beam;yVertical vortex vibration amplitude of the main beam;ξVertical damping ratio of the main beam. causeFigure 3It can be inferred that both main beams exhibit vertical vortex vibration at wind attack angles of 3 ° and 5 °, while no vortex vibration occurs at wind attack angles of 0 °, -3 °, and -5 °; There are two vortex vibration zones on both main beam sections, which are relatively close, and their dimensional wind speed ranges are 0.5-1.0 and 1.2-2.3, respectively; At different wind attack angles, the maximum amplitude of vertical vortex vibration in the first vortex vibration zone of the two main beam sections is basically the same, both around 1.8; When the wind attack angle is 3 ° and 5 °, the maximum amplitude of vertical vortex vibration in the second vortex vibration zone of section A is 3.94 and 8.82, respectively. When the wind attack angle is 5 °, the maximum amplitude of the main beam increases by about 1.19 times compared to 3 °. When the wind attack angle is 3 ° and 5 °, the maximum amplitude of vertical vortex vibration in the second vortex vibration zone of section B is 6.5 and 10.5, respectively. The maximum amplitude of the main beam at a wind attack angle of 5 ° is 75% higher than that at 3 °.
| Sc=4πmξ/(ρD2) | (1) |
In the formula:DFor the characteristic dimensions of the main beam section, the beam height is taken in this articleH；ρFor air density.
causeFigure 6It can be inferred that withScAs the vertical vortex vibration of the main beam increases, the maximum amplitude of vertical vortex vibration decreases linearly;ScSimilarly, when the wind angle of attack is 5 °, the maximum amplitude of the main beam is greater. However, for different cross-sections, the effect of the wind angle of attack on the vertical vortex vibration amplitude of the main beam varies slightlyScAt the angle of attack of the wind, the vertical vortex vibration amplitude of section B is larger than that of section A. This may be because section B is a separated side box, and when the incoming flow passes through section B, the airflow separation is more severe than that caused by the wind nozzle, resulting in poor vortex vibration performance of section B.
When the shedding frequency of the vortex is consistent with the natural frequency of the structure, vortex induced resonance occurs in the structure. Strouha numberStCharacteristic dimensions of the structural cross-sectionDFrequency of vortex sheddingfDividing the product by the incoming wind speedUIt is a dimensional parameter that characterizes the vortex vibration performance of a structural cross-section, and can be used to estimate the vortex vibration locking zone of the structure.
| 断面 | 不同攻角(°)时的St | |
| 3 | 5 | |
| 断面A(ξ=0.25%) | 0.096 2、0.038 3 | 0.089 9、0.036 3 |
| 断面B(ξ=0.30%) | 0.079 3、0.036 0 | 0.082 6、0.036 3 |
DownLoad:
CSV
The results of the segmental model vortex vibration test are not the vortex vibration amplitude of the real bridge, mainly because the segmental model wind tunnel test uses a rigid model, which does not consider the influence of modal and main beam vortex excitation force spanwise correlation. Based on linear and nonlinear vortex induced force models, Zhang Zhitian et al[26]The relationship between the experimental results of the main beam segment model and the actual bridge vortex vibration amplitude was derived, and it was defined as the modal influence factor. The calculation formulas for the modal influence factor based on linear and nonlinear vortex induced force models are as follows:
| ymax,oymax,1=φmax∫L0|φ(x)|dx∫L0φ2(x)dx | (2) |
| ymax,oymax,1=φmax√∫L0φ2(x)dx∫L0φ4(x)dx | (3) |
In the formula:ymax, 0andymax, 1The maximum amplitude of vortex vibration for the real bridge model and the segmental main beam respectively;φmaxThe maximum value of the main beam vibration function;φ(x）Main beam vibration type function value;LFor the main span of the bridge;x∈(0, L）The longitudinal position of the bridge.
Table 3The calculation results of the modal influence factor are given, and since the modal of the suspension bridge can be approximated by a sine curve, the sine curve result is adopted. causeTable 3It can be seen that the modal influence factors are all greater than 1, which means that the maximum amplitude of vortex induced resonance of the main beam obtained based on segment model experiments is too small. Ignoring the modal influence factors to evaluate the vortex vibration performance of the main beam is unsafe; At the same time, the modal influence factor calculated by the linear vortex induced force model is too large; Bridge A is a suspension bridge, and its mode can be estimated using a sine curve. However, the modal influence factor calculated through the sine mode is smaller than the actual modal influence factor of the bridge structure. The result obtained based on the linear vortex induced force model is about 12% smaller, while the result obtained based on the nonlinear model is basically consistent, with a difference of about 2%. Zhou Shuai and others[27]Through wind tunnel tests, the aerodynamic elasticity of the main beam of a long-span suspension bridge was compared with the high-order vortex vibration amplitude of the rigid model. It was found that the high-order vortex vibration amplitude of the aeroelastic model was about 1.3 times that of the rigid model.
| 模态影响因子 | 线性模型 | 非线性模型 |
| 桥梁A | 1.431 | 1.176 |
| 桥梁A(基于正弦模态计算) | 1.273 | 1.154 |
| 桥梁B | 1.565 | 1.216 |
DownLoad:
CSV
In order to gain a more intuitive understanding of the vortex vibration characteristics of the two types of open sections in the bridge state, based on the large-scale computational fluid dynamics software FLUENT, the flow around the outside of the two main beam sections was analyzed for the second vortex vibration zone of the main beam at a wind angle of 5 °[30].
The numerical simulation calculation domain is 38B×8BThe distance between the center of the cross-section and the front and rear boundaries is 14BAnd 24BThe distance from both the upper and lower boundaries is 4BThe surface boundaries of the cross-section and ancillary facilities are non slip wall boundaries, and the inlet is a uniform inflow velocity inlet with an inflow velocity of 10 m · s-1The outlet is a pressure outlet boundary condition, and both the upper and lower boundaries are symmetric boundary conditions. When dividing the grid, sparse grids are used in areas far from the cross-section, and grid refinement is carried out around the structural cross-section to control the size of the body fitted grid to be small enough to meet the requirementsy+The dimensional parameter in computational fluid dynamics is less than 30, and the total number of grids is 3.0 × 105For two-dimensional incompressible flows, adoptκ(Turbulent kinetic energy)-ω(Turbulence Frequency) SST Turbulence Model[31]And adopt wall function. The SIMPLE algorithm is used to solve the system of equations, and the convergence value is set to 1.0 × 10-6Set the dimensional one time step to 2.0 × 10-4To ensure that the Cron number is less than 5; The Reynolds number is consistent with the Reynolds number corresponding to the second vortex vibration zone during the main beam segment model test.
To verify the accuracy of numerical calculations, the numerical calculation results of the drag coefficient and lift coefficient of the two main beam sections were compared with the wind tunnel test resultsFigure 7The results show that the aerodynamic coefficients obtained from numerical calculations are within 5% of the wind tunnel test results, indicating the reliability of the numerical simulation method proposed in this paper.
(4) The next step will be based on wind tunnel tests to further explore the mechanism of vortex induced vibration in open cross-section main beams.
| [1] |
NIE Jian-guo, TAO Mu-xuan, WU Li-li, et al. Advances of research on steel-concrete composite bridges[J]. China Civil Engineering Journal, 2012, 45(6): 110-122. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TMGC201206016.htm
|
| [2] |
CHEN Bao-chun, MU Ting-min, CHEN Yi-yan, et al. State-of-the-art of research and engineering application of steel-concrete composite bridges in China[J]. Journal of Building Structures, 2013, 34(S1): 1-10. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JZJB2013S1001.htm
|
| [3] |
GE Yao-jun, ZHAO Lin, XU Kun. Review and reflection on vortex-induced vibration of main girders of long-span bridges[J]. China Journal of Highway Transport, 2019, 32(10): 1-18. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GLGL201206005.htm
|
| [4] |
JIN Ting, LIN Zhi-xing. Reynolds number effects on Strouhal number of flat-box girder bridge decks[J]. Engineering Mechanics, 2006, 23(10): 174-179. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-4750.2006.10.033
|
| [5] |
LARSEN A, ESDAHL S, ANDERSEN J, et al. Storebelt Suspension Bridge—vortex shedding excitation and mitigation by guide vanes[J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2000, 88(2): 283-296. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167610500000544
|
| [6] |
FUJINO Y, YOSHIDA Y. Wind-induced vibration and control of Trans-Tokyo Bay Crossing Bridge[J]. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2002, 128(8): 1012-1025. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2002)128:8(1012)
|
| [7] |
BELLOI M, FOSSATI F, GIAPPINO S, et al. Vortex induced vibrations of a bridge deck: dynamic response and surface pressure distribution[J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2014, 133(10): 160-168. http://www.researchgate.net/publication/288802238_Effects_of_railings_on_vortex-induced_vibration_of_a_bridge_deck_section
|
| [8] |
MA Cun-ming, WANG Jun-xin, LI Qiu-sheng, et al. Vortex-induced vibration performance and suppression mechanism for a long suspension bridge with wide twin-box girder[J]. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2018, 144(11): 04018202. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002198
|
| [9] |
WU Teng, KAREEM A. Vortex-induced vibration of bridge decks: Volterra series-based model[J]. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 2013, 139(12): 1831-1843. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000628
|
| [10] |
YANG Yong-xin, ZHOU Rui, GE Yao-jun, et al. Experimental studies on VIV performance and countermeasures for twin-box girder bridges with various slot width ratios[J]. Journal of Fluids and Structures, 2016, 66: 476-489. doi: 10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2016.08.010
|
| [11] |
LI Jia-wu, WANG Xin, ZHANG Yue, et al. Chaos characteristics of wind-induced vibrations for bridge[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2014, 14(3): 34-42. (in Chinese) http://transport.chd.edu.cn/oa/DArticle.aspx?type=view&id=201403005
|
| [12] |
KUBO Y, KIMURA K, SADASHIMA K, et al. Aerodynamic performance of improved shallow π shape bridge deck[J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2002, 90(12/13/14/15): 2113-2125. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167610502003288
|
| [13] |
IRWIN P A. Bluff body aerodynamics in wind engineering[J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2008, 96(6): 701-712.
|
| [14] |
ZHU Le-dong, ZHANG Hai, ZHANG Hong-jie. Mitigation effect of multi-orifice flow-distributing plate on vortex-induced resonance of narrow semi-closed box deck[J]. Journal of Experiments in Fluid Mechanics, 2012, 26(3): 50-55. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-9897.2012.03.009
|
| [15] |
ZHANG Zhi-tian, QING Qian-zhi, XIAO Wei, et al. Vortex- induced vibration and control method for a cable-stayed bridge with open cross section[J]. Journal of Hunan University (Natural Sciences), 2011, 38(7): 1-5. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HNDX201107002.htm
|
| [16] |
WANG Zhi-xiong, ZHANG Zhi-tian, QIE Kai, et al. Bending-torsion coupled vortex induced resonance of π-type open section cable stayed bridge and aerodynamic vibration reduction measures[J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2021, 40(1): 52-57. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZDCJ202101009.htm
|
| [17] |
QIAN Guo-wei, CAO Feng-chan, GE Yao-jun. Vortex-induced vibration performance of a cable-stayed bridge with Π shaped composite deck and its aerodynamic control measurements[J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2015, 34(2): 176-181. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZDCJ201502031.htm
|
| [18] |
MENG Xiao-liang, GUO Zhen-shan, DING Quan-shun, et al. Influence of wind fairing angle on vortex-induced vibrations and flutter performances of closed and semi-closed box decks[J]. Engineering Mechanics, 2011, 28(S1): 184-188, 194. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GCLX2011S1038.htm
|
| [19] |
ZHAN Qing-liang, ZHOU Zhi-yong, GE Yao-jun. Experimental study of aerodynamic performance of open cross sections of composite girders[J]. Bridge Construction, 2017, 47(1): 17-22. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-QLJS201701004.htm
|
| [20] |
DUAN Qing-song, MA Cun-ming. Study of vortex-induced vibration performance and vibration suppression measures for composite girder with edge boxes[J]. Bridge Construction, 2017, 47(5): 30-35. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-4722.2017.05.006
|
| [21] |
FANG Gen-shen, YANG Yong-xin, GE Yao-jun, et al. Vortex-induced vibration performance and aerodynamic countermeasures of semi-open separated twin-box deck[J]. China Civil Engineering Journal, 2017, 50(3): 74-82. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TMGC201703009.htm
|
| [22] |
WANG Jun-xin, MA Cun-ming, LI Ming-shui, et al. Experimental and numerical studies of the vortex-induced vibration behavior of an asymmetrical composite beam[J]. Advances in Structural Engineering, 2019, 22(10): 2236-2249. doi: 10.1177/1369433219836851
|
| [23] |
MA Cun-ming, DUAN Qing-song, LIAO Hai-li. Experimental investigation on aerodynamic behavior of a long span cable-stayed bridge under construction[J]. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 2018, 22(7): 2492-2501. doi: 10.1007/s12205-017-0402-7
|
| [24] |
YANG Yong-yi, CHEN Ke-jian, LI Ming-shui, et al. Test study of vortex-induced vibration of Hanjiatuo Changjiang River Bridge at high and low Reynolds numbers[J]. Bridge Construction, 2015, 45(3): 76-81. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-QLJS201503017.htm
|
| [25] |
MATSUMOTO M. Vortex shedding of bluff bodies: a review[J]. Journal of Fluids and Structures, 1999, 13(7/8): 791-811. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889974699902499
|
| [26] |
ZHANG Zhi-tian, CHEN Zheng-qing. Similarity of amplitude of sectional model to that of full bridge in the case of vortex-induced resonance[J]. China Civil Engineering Journal, 2011, 44(7): 77-82. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TMGC201107013.htm
|
| [27] |
ZHOU Shuai, CHEN Zheng-qing, HUA Xu-gang, et al. Wind tunnel experimental research on high-mode vortex-induced vibration for large span bridges[J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2017, 36(18): 29-35, 69. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZDCJ201718005.htm
|
| [28] |
LI Ming-shui, SUN Yan-guo, LIAO Hai-li. A linear approach of vortex induced vibration for long span bridges based on partial correlation of aerodynamic force[J]. Acta Aerodynamic Sinica, 2012, 30(5): 675-679. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-KQDX201205019.htm
|
| [29] |
ZHU Le-dong. Mass simulation and amplitude conversation of bridge sectional model test for vortex-induced resonance[J]. Engineering Mechanics, 2005, 10(5): 204-208. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-4750.2005.05.037
|
| [30] |
HUANG Li, ZHOU Shuai, LIANG Peng. Number simulation for two separate vortex-induced vibration lock-in intervals of bridge sections[J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2015, 35(11): 47-53. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZDCJ201611009.htm
|
| [31] |
LIU Hai-tao. Influence of y + value on calculation accuracy of aerodynamic parameters of MIRA model[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2019, 19(4): 125-136. (in Chinese) http://transport.chd.edu.cn/oa/DArticle.aspx?type=view&id=201904012
|
| [1] | YAN Ban-fu, OUYANG Kang, LIANG Cai. Review on research of non-contact displacement measurement technologies in bridge engineering[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2024, 24(1): 43-67. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2024.01.003 |
| [2] | LIU Zhuang-zhuang, LI Yao-cheng, WANG Feng, SHA Ai-min. Slope effects on highway-side photovoltaics and its wind load calculation method[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2024, 24(5): 1-11. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2024.05.001 |
| [3] | XU Ming, LIN Yong-zhi, ZHOU Wen-xuan. Back analysis of build-up effect of earth pressure behind integral abutment[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2022, 22(5): 163-172. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2022.05.009 |
| [4] | LI Jia-wu, HONG Guang, WANG Jun, WANG Jia-ying, WANG Feng, LI Yu. Wind-induced vibration performance of suspended double-deck closed box girder bridge deck[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2022, 22(6): 207-219. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2022.06.014 |
| [5] | LI Chun-guang, YAN Hu-bin, HAN Yan, MAO Yu, LUO Chu-yu. Active blowing flow control for VIV of streamlined box girder and its mechanism[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2022, 22(6): 220-231. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2022.06.015 |
| [6] | YAO Yuan, XU Zhen-fei, SONG Ya-dong, SHEN Long-jiang, LI Chuan-long. Mechanism of train tail lateral sway of EMUs in tunnel based on vortex-induced vibration[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2021, 21(5): 114-124. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2021.05.010 |
| [7] | ZOU Si-min, HE Xu-hui, WANG Han-feng, TANG Lin-bo, PENG Tian-wei. Wind tunnel experiment on aerodynamic characteristics of high-speed train-bridge system under crosswind[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2020, 20(1): 132-139. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2020.01.010 |
| [8] | FENG Zhong-ju, HU Hai-bo, WANG Fu-chun, XU Zhan-hui, YAO Xian-hua, LIU Ning. Field simulation test of bridge pile foundation damage in high altitude and strong salt marsh area[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2019, 19(3): 46-57. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2019.03.006 |
| [9] | LIU Jiang, LIU Yong-jian, FANG Jian-hong, LIU Guang-long, STIEMER SF. Vertical temperature gradient patterns of上-shaped steel-concrete composite girder in arctic-alpine plateau region[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2017, 17(4): 32-44. |
| [10] | LI Zai-wei, LEI Xiao-yan, GAO Liang. New numerical simulation method of shortwave track irregularity[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2016, 16(1): 37-45. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2016.01.005 |
| [11] | FU Jin, JIANG Yu, PENG Hui, DONG Yuan-hong, YUAN Kun. Early refreezing law of large-diameter cast-in-place piles in permafrost regions[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2016, 16(4): 104-111. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2016.04.011 |
| [12] | LIU Yong-jian, LIU Shi-zhong, MI Jing, CHENG Gao. Vehicle-bridge coupled vibration of highway double-deck steel truss bridge[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2012, 12(6): 20-28. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2012.06.004 |
| [13] | LIU Ying, ZUO Dun-wen, WANG Yao-hua, ZHAO Jun, YAN Hai-chun, JI Chong, HE Ji-xian. Numerical simulation of airliner cabin door under explosion impact loading and reinforcement experiment[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2011, 11(6): 50-55. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2011.06.008 |
| [14] | DING Jun-jun, LI Fu. Numerical simulation of one side rail irregularity[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2010, 10(1): 29-35. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2010.01.006 |
| [15] | BAI Hua, LI Jia-wu, CUI Xin, LIU Jian-xin. Reynolds number effect of streamlined bridge section[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2010, 10(5): 17-22. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2010.05.004 |
| [16] | LUO Fu-qiang, HANG Jin, HE Ren. Numerical simulation of engine bleeding brake[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2009, 9(5): 55-61. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2009.05.010 |
| [17] | Zhang Yong-qing, Wang Xuan-cang, Wang Chao-hui, Chen Xi-mei. Numerical simulation and field test at the cut to fill location of subgrade treated with geogrids[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2008, 8(3): 63-67. |
| [18] | HU Qing-an, QIAO Yun-qiang, LIU Jian-xin, LI Jia-wu. Buffeting performance of bridge tower under yawed wind during construction[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2008, 8(2): 40-43. |
| [19] | TIAN Hong-qi. Study Evolvement of Train Aerodynamics in China[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2006, 6(1): 1-9. |
| [20] | Wang Shuang-jie, Chen Jian-bing, Huang Xiao-ming. Numerical simulation of cooling effect for heat pipe subgrade[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2005, 5(3): 41-46. |
| 1. | 黄林，董佳慧，王骑，廖海黎，李志国. 导流板倾斜角度对Π型叠合梁涡振性能的影响研究. 振动工程学报. 2024(01): 40-51 .  | |
| 2. | 段青松，马存明. 检修车轨道对窄幅流线型箱梁涡振性能影响研究. 桥梁建设. 2024(01): 88-94 . | |
| 3. | 陈天瑀，马存明，段青松，向鸿鑫. 大跨度公铁两用双层钢桁桥涡激振动控制研究. 振动与冲击. 2024(05): 12-19 . | |
| 4. | 黄林，董佳慧，廖海黎，蒲诗雨，王骑. 基于CFD与风洞试验的边主梁涡振气动措施. 西南交通大学学报. 2024(02): 343-352 . | |
| 5. | 王峰，邢丰，熊川，王佳盈，郑晓东，张久鹏，黄晓明. 边箱式π型断面涡振性能及导流板措施参数研究. 湖南大学学报(自然科学版). 2024(05): 114-122 . | |
| 6. | 徐胜乙，方根深，赵林，宋神友，葛耀君. 双幅钢箱梁竖弯涡振气动力演变特性. 振动工程学报. 2024(07): 1139-1150 . | |
| 7. | 李震，邹云峰，刘路路，何旭辉，韩艳，刘兆光. π型开口截面斜拉桥涡激振动的气动抑振措施试验研究. 铁道科学与工程学报. 2023(09): 3416-3424 . | |
| 8. | 李春光，颜虎斌，韩艳，毛禹，罗楚钰. 流线型箱梁涡振主动吹气流动控制及作用机理. 交通运输工程学报. 2022(06): 220-231 .  本站查看 |
Figures(9) / Tables(3)
Copyright《Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering》编辑部陕ICP备05001904号-1
Address ：Editorial Department of Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, Chang 'an University, Middle Section of South Second Ring Road, Xi 'an, Shaanxi（710064） Tel：029-82334388 Email：jygc@chd.edu.cn
All visit:1718103Today's visit:382
Supported by:
Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co. Ltd
DUAN Qing-song, MA Cun-ming. Comparison of vertical vortex-induced vibration characteristics between semi-open girder and separated edge-boxes open girder[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2021, 21(4): 130-138. doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2021.04.009
| 参数 | 桥梁A | 桥梁B | ||
| 实桥 | 模型 | 实桥 | 模型 | |
| 主梁宽度B/m | 38.00 | 0.76 | 38.00 | 0.76 |
| 主梁高度H/m | 2.800 | 0.056 | 2.700 | 0.054 |
| 每延米等效质量m/(kg·m-1) | 41 911.000 | 16.706 | 61 875.000 | 24.554 |
| 每延米等效质量惯矩I/(kg·m2·m-1) | 3 505 138 | 0.561 | 6 748 829.000 | 1.080 |
| 竖向频率fv/Hz | 0.260 3 | 2.440 0 | 0.288 9 | 2.602 0 |
| 扭转频率ft/Hz | 0.466 | 4.300 | 0.700 | 6.372 |
DownLoad:
CSV
| 断面 | 不同攻角(°)时的St | |
| 3 | 5 | |
| 断面A(ξ=0.25%) | 0.096 2、0.038 3 | 0.089 9、0.036 3 |
| 断面B(ξ=0.30%) | 0.079 3、0.036 0 | 0.082 6、0.036 3 |
DownLoad:
CSV
| 模态影响因子 | 线性模型 | 非线性模型 |
| 桥梁A | 1.431 | 1.176 |
| 桥梁A(基于正弦模态计算) | 1.273 | 1.154 |
| 桥梁B | 1.565 | 1.216 |
DownLoad:
CSV
| 参数 | 桥梁A | 桥梁B | ||
| 实桥 | 模型 | 实桥 | 模型 | |
| 主梁宽度B/m | 38.00 | 0.76 | 38.00 | 0.76 |
| 主梁高度H/m | 2.800 | 0.056 | 2.700 | 0.054 |
| 每延米等效质量m/(kg·m-1) | 41 911.000 | 16.706 | 61 875.000 | 24.554 |
| 每延米等效质量惯矩I/(kg·m2·m-1) | 3 505 138 | 0.561 | 6 748 829.000 | 1.080 |
| 竖向频率fv/Hz | 0.260 3 | 2.440 0 | 0.288 9 | 2.602 0 |
| 扭转频率ft/Hz | 0.466 | 4.300 | 0.700 | 6.372 |
| 断面 | 不同攻角(°)时的St | |
| 3 | 5 | |
| 断面A(ξ=0.25%) | 0.096 2、0.038 3 | 0.089 9、0.036 3 |
| 断面B(ξ=0.30%) | 0.079 3、0.036 0 | 0.082 6、0.036 3 |
| 模态影响因子 | 线性模型 | 非线性模型 |
| 桥梁A | 1.431 | 1.176 |
| 桥梁A(基于正弦模态计算) | 1.273 | 1.154 |
| 桥梁B | 1.565 | 1.216 |
DownLoad:
DownLoad:
