Advertisement

Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 219–231 | Cite as

Experimental study of vibration mitigation of mast arm signal structures with particle-thrust damping based tuned mass damper

  • Yunfeng ZhangEmail author
  • Heng Liu
Article
  • 23 Downloads

Abstract

Large amplitude vibration of mast arm structures due to wind loads are the primary contributing factor to the reduced fatigue life of signal support structures. To alleviate this problem of wind-induced in-plane vibration of mast arm signal structures, a particle-thrust damping based turned mass damper (PTD-TMD) device is adopted and its damping effect is characterized experimentally. The particle-thrust damping is a passive damping device that does not require electric power and is temperature independent. Based on the calibration test, an equivalent dynamic model of the PTD-TMD device is developed and used for numerical simulation study. The damping effects of this PTD-TMD device on signal support structures was investigated through both numerical analysis and laboratory testing of a 50-ft (15.24 m) mast arm structure including both free vibration and forced vibration tests. The experimental test and numerical study results show that vibration response behavior of mast arm signal support structures can be significantly reduced by installing the PTD-TMD that can increase the critical damping ratio of the mast arm signal structures to 4%. The stress range at the welded connection between the mast arm and traffic pole is also reduced.

Keywords

fatigue mast arm signal support structures tuned mass damper vibration 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgement

The work described in this paper was partially supported through a research grant from Maryland State Highway Administration (MdSHA) and National Transportation Research Center at University of Maryland. The assistance of Dr. Chung C. Fu and staff members of MdSHA with the mast arm structure specimen is greatly appreciated. However, the opinions and conclusions expressed in this paper are solely those of the writers and do not necessarily refl ect the views of the sponsors.

References

  1. AASHTO (2009), Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals, Fifth Edition, Chapter 11.Google Scholar
  2. Albert MN, Manuel L, Frank KH and Wood SL (2007), “Field Testing of Cantilevered Traffic Signal Structures Under Truck–Induced Gust Loads”, FHWA/TX–08/0–4586–2, Center for Transportation Research, University of Texas at Austinz.Google Scholar
  3. Alderson JL (1999), “Fatigue Study of Cantilevered Traffic Signal Mast Arms”, PhD Dissertation, University of Missouri–Columbia, Columbia, Missouri.Google Scholar
  4. ANSYS (2016), ANSYS Academic Research, Release 16.2, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  5. Chen G, Wu J, Jiaqing Yu (2001), “Fatigue Assessment of Traffic Signal Mast–arms Based on Field Test Data under Natural Wind Gusts,” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1770: 188–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chopra AK (2012), Dynamics of Structures, 4th Edition, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USA.Google Scholar
  7. Christenson R, Cashany M, Hua J and Zuo D (2014), “Field Testing of Signal Head Vibration Absorber to Reduce Fatigue in Wind–Excited Traffic Signal Support Structures,” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2406: 42–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Christenson R and Hoque S (2001), “Reducing Fatigue in Wind–Excited Support Structures of Traffic Signals with Innovative Vibration Absorber,” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2251: 16–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cook RA, Bloomquist D, Richard D and Kalajian MA (2001), “Damping of Cantilevered Traffic Signal Structures,” ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 127(12): 1476–1483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cook RA, Bloomquist D, Kalajian MA and Cannon VA (1998), “Mechanical Damping Systems for Traffic Signal Mast Arms,” Report WPI 0510775, Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station, University of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
  11. Dexter RJ and Ricker MJ (2002), “Fatigue–Resistant Design of Cantilevered Signal, Sign, and Light Supports,” NCHRP Report 469, Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board of the National Academies.Google Scholar
  12. Fouad FH, Davidson JS, Delatte N, Calvert EA, Chen S, Nunez E and Abdalla R (2003), “Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires, and Traffic Signals,” NCHRP Report 494, Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board of the National Academies.Google Scholar
  13. Gilani A and Whittaker A (2000a), “Fatigue–Life Evaluation of Steel Post Structures. I: Background and analysis,” ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 126(3): 322–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gilani A and Whittaker A (2000b), “Fatigue–Life Evaluation of Steel Post Structures. II: Experimentation,” ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 126(3): 331–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hamilton HR, GS Riggs and JA Puckett (2000), “Increased Damping in Cantilevered Traffic Signal Structures,” ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 126(4): 530–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hartnagel BA and Barker MG (1999), “Strain Measurements on Traffic Signal Mast Arms,” Proc. ASCE Structures Congress, New Orleans, LA, 1111–1114.Google Scholar
  17. Heeden A (1999), “Fatigue Evaluation of the Mast–Armto–Pole Connection in Traffic Signal Structures using Finite Element Analysis,” Master’s Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Kansas.Google Scholar
  18. Kaczinski MR, RJ Dexter and JP Van Dien (1998), “Fatigue–Resistant Design of Cantilevered Signal, Sign, and Light Supports,” NCHRP Report 412, Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board of the National Academies.Google Scholar
  19. Kashar L, Nester M, Jones J, Hariri M and Friezner, S (1999), “Analysis of the Catastrophic Failure of the Support Structure of a Changeable Message Sign,” Proceedings of the Structures Congress, 1115–1118.Google Scholar
  20. Koenigs MT (2003), “Fatigue Resistance of Traffic Signal Mast–Arm Connection Details,” PhD Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  21. Li Z and Zhang Y (2014), “Fatigue Life Prognosis Study of Welded Tubular Joints in Signal Support Structures,” International Journal of Steel Structures, 14(2): 281–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McManus PS, HR Hamilton III and JA Puckett (2003), “Damping in Cantilevered Traffic Signal Structures under Forced Vibration,” ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 129(3): 373–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ocel JM, Dexter RJ and Hajjar JF (2006), “Fatigue–Resistant Design for Overhead Signs, Mast–Arm Signal Poles, and Lighting Standards,” No. MN/RC–2006–07, St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Department of Transportation.Google Scholar
  24. Shah BM, Pillet D, Bai XM, Keer LM, Wang QJ and Snurr RQ (2009), “Construction and Characterization of a Particle–based Thrust Damping System,” Journal of Sound and Vibration, 326(3): 489–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. South Jeffrey M (1997), “Fatigue of Tube–to–Plate Fillet Welds and Methods for Their Improvement,” No. FHWA/IL/PR–118.Google Scholar
  26. Veeramuthuvel P, Shankar K and Sairajan KK (2017), “Application of RBF Neural Network in Prediction of Particle Damping Parameters from Experimental Data,” Journal of Vibration and Control, 23(6): 909–929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dept. of Civil & Environmental EngineeringUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations