Advertisement

Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

, Volume 10, Issue 4, pp 363–384 | Cite as

Influence of fluid-structure interaction on vortex induced vibration and lock-in phenomena in long span bridges

  • Nazim Abdul Nariman
Research Article

Abstract

In this paper, deck models of a cable stayed bridge are generated in ABAQUS-finite element program once using only CFD model (one-way fluid-structure interaction) and another by using both the CFD model and the CSD model together (two-way fluid-structure interaction) in a co-simulation. Shedding frequencies for the associated wind velocities in the lock-in region are calculated in both approaches. The results are validated with Simiu and Scanlan results. The lift and drag coefficients are determined for the two approaches and the latter results are validated with the flat plate theory results by Munson and coauthors. A decrease in the critical wind velocity and the shedding frequencies considering two-way approach was determined compared to those obtained in the one-way approach. The results of the lift and drag forces in the two-way approach showed appreciable decrease in their values. It was concluded that the two-way approach predicts earlier vortex induced vibration for lower critical wind velocities and lock-in phenomena will appear at lower natural frequencies of the long span bridges. This helps the designers to efficiently plan and consider for the design and safety of the long span bridge against this type of vibration.

Keywords

vortex-induced vibration fluid-structure interaction Strouhal number lock-in kinetic energy 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Budarapu P R, Narayana T S S, Rammohan B, Rabczuk T. Directionality of sound radiation from rectangular panels. Applied Acoustics, 2015, 89: 128–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yang S W, Budarapu P R, Mahapatra D R, Bordas S, Zi G, Rabczuk T. A meshless adaptive multiscale method for fracture. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 96B: 382–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Budarapu P R, Gracie R, Yang S W, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. Efficient coarse graining in multiscale modeling of fracture. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 69: 126–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Budarapu P R, Gracie R, Bordas S, Rabczuk T. An adaptive multiscale method for quasi-static crack growth. Computational Mechanics, 2014, 53(6): 1129–1148zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Talebi H, Silani M, Bordas S, Kerfriden P, Rabczuk T. A computational library for multiscale modelling of material failure. Computational Mechanics, 2014, 53(5): 1047–1071MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Talebi H, Silani M, Bordas S, Kerfriden P, Rabczuk T. Molecular dynamics/XFEM coupling by a three-dimensional extended bridging domain with applications to dynamic brittle fracture. International Journal for Multiscale Computational Engineering, 2013, 11(6): 527–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Amiri F, Milan D, Shen Y, Rabczuk T, Arroyo M. Phase-field modeling of fracture in linear thin shells. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 69: 102–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhuang X, Huang R, Zhu H, Askes H, Mathisen K. A new and simple locking-free triangular thick plate element using independent shear degrees of freedom. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 2013, 75: 1–7zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhuang X, Augarde C, Mathisen K. Fracture modelling using meshless methods and level sets in 3D: framework and modelling. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2012, 92(11): 969–998MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cai Y, Zhu H, Zhuang X. A continuous/discontinuous deformation analysis (CDDA) method based on deformable blocks for fracture modelling. Frontiers of Structural & Civil Engineering, 2014, 7(4): 369–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. Cracking particles: a simplified meshfree method for arbitrary evolving cracks. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2004, 61(13): 2316–2343zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rabczuk T, Belytschko T, Xiao S P. Stable particle methods based on Lagrangian kernels. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2004, 193(12-14): 1035–1063MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rabczuk T, Akkermann J, Eibl J. A numerical model for reinforced concrete structures. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2005, 42(5-6): 1327–1354zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rabczuk T, Eibl J. Numerical analysis of prestressed concrete beams using a coupled element free Galerkin/nite element method. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2004, 41(3-4): 1061–1080zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. Adaptivity for structured meshfree particle methods in 2D and 3D. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2005, 63(11): 1559–1582MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zi G, Rabczuk T, Wall WA. Extended meshfree methods without branch enrichment for cohesive cracks. Computational Mechanics, 2007, 40(2): 367–382zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. Application of particle methods to static fracture of reinforced concrete structures. International Journal of Fracture, 2006, 137(1-4): 19–49zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rabczuk T, Bordas S, Zi G. A three-dimensional meshfree method for continuous multiple crack initiation, nucleation and propagation in statics and dynamics. Computational Mechanics, 2007, 40 (3): 473–495zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bordas S, Rabczuk T. Zi. G. Three-dimensional crack initiation, propagation, branching and junction in non-linear materials by extrinsic discontinuous enrichment of meshfree methods without asymptotic enrichment. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2008, 75 (5): 943–960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rabczuk T, Zi G, Bordas S, Nguyen-Xuan H. A geometrically nonlinear three dimensional cohesive crack method for reinforced concrete structures. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2008, 75 (16): 4740–4758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rabczuk T, Bordas S, Zi G. On three-dimensional modelling of crack growth using partition of unity methods. Computers & Structures, 2010, 88(23-24): 1391–1411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Onate E, Garcia J. A Finite Element Method for Fluid-Structure Interaction with Surface Waves Using A Finite Calculus Formulation. International Centre for Numerical Methods in Engineering. Universidad Politecnica de Cataluna, 2001, PI208: 1–34zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rabczuk T, Zi G, Bordas S, Nguyen-Xuan H. A simple and robust three-dimensional cracking-particle method without enrichment. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2010, 199(37-40): 2437–2455zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nguyen-Thanh N, Valizadeh N, Nguyen M N, Nguyen-Xuan H, Zhuang X, Areias P, Zi G, Bazilevs Y, De Lorenzis L, Rabczuk T. An extended isogeometric thin shell analysis based on Kirchho-Love theory. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2015, 284: 265–291MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Areias P, Rabczuk T. Finite strain fracture of plates and shells with configurational forces and edge rotation. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2013, 94(12): 1099–1122MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chau-Dinh T, Zi G, Lee P S, Song J H, Rabczuk T. Phantom-node method for shell models with arbitrary cracks. Computers & Structures, 2012, 92–93: 242–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nguyen-Thanh N, Kiendl J, Nguyen-Xuan H, Wuchner R, Bletzinger K U, Bazilevs Y, Rabczuk T. Rotation free isogeometric thin shell analysis using PHT-splines. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2011, 200(47-48): 3410–3424MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nguyen-Thanh N, Rabczuk T, Nguyen-Xuan H, Bordas S. A smoothed finite element method for shell analysis. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2008, 198(2): 165–177zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Thai H C, Nguyen-Xuan H, Bordas S, Nguyen-Thanh N, Rabczuk T. Isogeometric analysis of laminated composite plates using the higher-order shear deformation theory. Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures, 2015, 22(6): 451–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Thai C H, Ferreira A J M, Bordas S, Rabczuk T, Nguyen-Xuan H. Isogeometric analysis of laminated composite and sandwich plates using a new inversetrigonometric shear deformation theory. European Journal of Mechanics. A, Solids, 2014, 43: 89–108CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Phan-Dao H, Nguyen-Xuan H, Thai-Hoang C, Nguyen-Thoi T, Rabczuk T. An edge-based smoothed finite element method for analysis of laminated composite plates. International Journal of Computational Methods, 2013, 10(1): 1340005MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Valizadeh N, Natarajan S, Gonzalez-Estrada O A, Rabczuk T. Tinh Quoc Bui, Bordas S.P.A.: NURBS-based nite element analysis of functionally graded plates: static bending, vibration, buckling and flutter. Composite Structures, 2013, 99: 309–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Thai C H, Nguyen-Xuan H, Nguyen-Thanh N, Le T H, Nguyen-Thoi T, Rabczuk T. Static, free vibration and buckling analysis of laminated composite Reissner-Mindlin plates using NURBS-based isogeometric approach. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2012, 91(6): 571–603MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nguyen-Xuan H, Rabczuk T, Bordas S, Debongnie J F. A smoothed finite element method for plate analysis. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2008, 197(13–16): 1184–1203zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rabczuk T, Zi G. A meshfree method based on the local partition of unity for cohesive cracks. Computational Mechanics, 2007, 39 (6): 743–760zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Areias P, Msekh M A, Rabczuk T. Damage and fracture algorithm using the screened Poisson equation and local remeshing. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2016, 158: 116–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Areias P, Rabczuk T, Camanho P P. Finite strain fracture of 2D problems with injected anisotropic softening elements. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 72: 50–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Areias P, Rabczuk T, Dias-da- Costa D. Element-wise fracture algorithm based on rotation of edges. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2013, 110: 113–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Areias P, Rabczuk T, Camanho P P. Initially rigid cohesive laws and fracture based on edge rotations. Computational Mechanics, 2013, 52(4): 931–947zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ghorashi S, Valizadeh N, Mohammadi S, Rabczuk T. T-spline based XIGA for fracture analysis of orthotropic Media. Computers & Structures, 2015, 147: 138–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nguyen-Thanh N, Valizadeh N, Nguyen M N, Nguyen-Xuan H, Zhuang X, Areias P, Zi G, Bazilevs Y, De Lorenzis L, Rabczuk T. An extended isogeometric thin shell analysis based on Kirchhoff-Love theory. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2015, 284: 265–291MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ghasemi H, Brighenti R, Zhuang X, Muthu J, Rabczuk T. Optimum fiber content and distribution in fiber-reinforced solids using a reliability and NURBS based sequential optimization approach. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2015, 51 (1): 99–112MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Amiri F, Anitescu C, Arroyo M, Bordas S, Rabczuk T. XLME interpolants, a seamless bridge between XFEM and enriched meshless methods. Computational Mechanics, 2014, 53(1): 45–57MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Nanthakumar S, Lahmer T, Zhuang X, Zi G, Rabczuk T. Detection of material interfaces using a regularized level set method in piezoelectric structures. Inverse Problems in Science and Engineering, 2016, 24(1): 153–176MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Vu-Bac N, Lahmer T, Zhuang X, Nguyen-Thoi T, Rabczuk T. A software framework for probabilistic sensitivity analysis for computationally expensive models. Advances in Engineering Software, 2016, 100: 19–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nguyen B H, Tran H D, Anitescu C, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. An isogeometric symmetric galerkin boundary element method for elastostatic analysis. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2016, 306: 252–275MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Quoc T T, Rabczuk T, Meschke G, Bazilevs Y. A higher-order stress-based gradient-enhanced damage model based on isogeometric analysis. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2016, 304: 584–604MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Nguyen V P, Anitescu C, Bordas S, Rabczuk T. Isogeometric analysis: An overview and computer implementation aspects. Mathematics and Computers in Simulations, 2015, 117, 4190: 89–116MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Valizadeh N, Bazilevs Y, Chen J S, Rabczuk T. A coupled IGAmeshfree discretization of arbitrary order of accuracy and without global geometry parameterization. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2015, 293: 20–37MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Anitescu C, Jia Y, Zhang Y, Rabczuk T. An isogeometric collocation method using superconvergent points. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2015, 284: 1073–1097MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Talebi H, Silani M, Rabczuk T. Concurrent multiscale modelling of three dimensional crack and dislocation propagation. Advances in Engineering Software, 2015, 80: 82–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Santiago B, Ramon C. On some fluid structure iterative algorithms using pressure segregation methods, application to aeroelasticity. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2007, 72(1): 46–71MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Frandsen J B. Numerical bridge deck studies using finite elements Part I: flutter. Journal of Fluids and Structures, 2004, 19(2): 171–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Vazquez J G V. Nonlinear Analysis of Orthotropic Membrane and Shell Structures Including Fluid-Structure Interaction. Ph D dissertation, Barcelona: Department of resistance of materials and structures and engineering, Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya, 2007Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rabczuk T, Eibl J, Stempniewski L. Simulation of high velocity concrete fragmentation using SPH/MLSPH. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2003, 56(10): 1421–1444zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Rabczuk T, Eibl J, Stempniewski L. Numerical analysis of high speed concrete fragmentation using a meshfree Lagrangian method. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2004, 71(4-6): 547–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rabczuk T, Eibl J. Modeling dynamic failure of concrete with meshfree particle methods. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2006, 32(11): 1878–1897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Rabczuk T, Samaniego E, Belytschko T. Simplied model for predicting impulsive loads on submerged structures to account for fluid-structure interaction. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2007, 34(2): 163–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Rabczuk T, Areias P, Belytschko T. A simplied meshfree method for shear bands with cohesive surfaces. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2007, 69(5): 993–1021zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Rabczuk T, Samaniego E. Discontinuous modelling of shear bands using adaptive meshfree methods. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2008, 197(6-8): 641–658MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. A three dimensional large deformation meshfree method for arbitrary evolving cracks. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2007, 196(29–30): 2777–2799MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Rabczuk T, Gracie R, Song J H, Belytschko T. Immersed particle method for fluid-structure interaction. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2010, 81(1): 48–71MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Rabczuk T, Areias P, Belytschko T. A meshfree thin shell method for nonlinear dynamic fracture. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2007, 72(5): 524–548MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Budarapu P R, Javvaji B, Sutrakar V K, Roy Mahapatra D, Zi G, Rabczuk T. Crack propagation in Graphene. Journal of Applied Physics, 2015, 118(6): 064307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Sudhir Sastry Y B, Budarapu P R, Madhavi N, Krishna Y. Buckling analysis of thin wall stiffened composite panels. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 96B: 459–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Sudhir Sastry Y B, Budarapu P R, Krishna Y, Devaraj S. Studies on ballistic impact of the composite panels. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 72: 2–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Budarapu P R, Sudhir Sastry Y B, Javvaji B, Mahapatra D R. Vibration analysis of multi-walled carbon nanotubes embedded in elastic medium. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2014, 8(2): 151–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Budarapu P R, Sudhir Sastry Y B, Natarajan R. Design concepts of an aircraft wing: composite and morphing airfoil with auxetic structures. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, (accepted for publication)Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Hou G, Wang J, Layton A. Numerical methods for fluid-structure interaction-A review. Journal of Communications in Computational Physics, 2012, 12(2): 337–377MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Raja R S. Coupled fluid structure interaction analysis on a cylinder exposed to ocean wave loading. M.Sc.[dissertation]. Goteborg: Department of Applied Mechanics, Chalmers University of Technology, 2012Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Schmucker H, Flemming F, Coulson S. Two-Way Coupled Fluid Structure Interaction Simulation of a Propeller Turbine. International Journal of Fluid Machinery and Systems, 2010, 3(4): 342–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Iliev O, Mikelic A, Turek S, Popova P. Fluid structure interaction problems in deformable porous media: Toward permeability of deformable porous media. Fraunhofer-Institut für Techno-und Wirtschaftsmathematik ITWM, 2004, 65, 1–39Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Liaghat T. Two Way Fluid Structure Coupling Vibration and Damping Analysis of an Oscillating Hydrofoil. Master Thesis, Montreal: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Polytechnic School of Montreal, 2014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Benra F K, Dohmen H J, Pei J, Schuster S, Wan B. A Comparison of one-way and two-way coupling methods for numerical analysis of fluid-structure interactions. Journal of Applied Mathematics, 2011, 853560: 1–16MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Bijl H, Alexander H, Zuijlen V, Bosscher S. Two Level Algorithms for Partitioned Fluid-Structure Interaction Computations. European Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics, Delft, Netherland, September 5–8, 2006Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Razzaq M, Tsotskas C, Turek S, Hron J, Kipouros T, Savill M. Insight into Fluid Structure Interaction Benchmarking through Multi-Objective Optimization. Wiley InterScience, 2010, 2: 1–25zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Forster C. Robust Methods for Fluid-Structure Interaction With Stabilized Finite Elements. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Stuttgart: Institute of Structural Mechanics, University of Stuttgart, 2007Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Bonisch S, Dunne T, Rannacher R. Numerics of fluid-structure interaction. Hemodynamical flows, modeling. Analysis and Simulation, 2008, 37: 333–378MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Hengstler J A N. Influence of the Fluid-Structure Interaction on the Vibrations of Structures. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Zurich: Faculty of Engineering, ETH Zurich, 2013Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Vorgelegt V. Fluid-Structure Interaction Induced Oscillation of Flexible Structures in Uniform Flows. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Erlangen: Faculty of Engineering, Universitat Erlangen-Nurnberg, 2012Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Sarkic A. Validated numerical simulation of fluid-structure interactions of bridge girders in turbulent wind fields. PhD [dissertation], Bochum: Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, 2014Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Ubertini F. Wind Effects on Bridges: Response, Stability and Control. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Pavia: School of Civil Engineering, University of Pavia, 2008Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Selvam R P, Tarini M J, Larsen A. Computer modeling of flow around bridges using LES and FEM. Journal of wind engineering, 1998, 77&78: 643–651Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Munson B R, Young D F, Okiishi T H. Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics. 4th ed. New York: JohnWiley & Sons, Inc. 2002, 578–584zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Bourdier S. Vortex-Induced Vibrations of a non-linearly supported rigid cylinder. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Southampton: School of Civil Engineering and the Environment, University of Southampton, 2008Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Peng J, Chen G S. Flow oscillating structure interactions and the applications to propulsion and energy harvest. Journal of Applied Physics Research, 2012, 4(2): 1–14MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Liaw K F. Simulation of Flow around Bluff Bodies and Bridge Deck Sections using CFD. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Nottingham: School of Civil Engineering, University of Nottingham, 2005Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Farshidianfar A, Zanganeh H. The lock-in phenomenon in VIV using a modified wake oscillator model for both high and low mass-damping ratio. Iranian Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 2009, 10(2): 5–28Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Puckett J, Johnson R, Barker M. 2011. Study of the Effects ofWind Power and Vortex-Induced Vibrations to Establish Fatigue Design Criteria for High-Mast Poles. Department of Transportation, University Transportation Centers Program, University of Wyoming, Wyoming, USA, August, 2011Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Salvatori L. Assessment and Mitigation of Wind Risk of Suspended-Span Bridges. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Braunschweig and Florence: Faculty of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Environmental Sciences, University of Braunschweig and Faculty of Engineering, University of Florence, 2007Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Kuroda S. Numerical simulation of flow around a box girder of a long span suspension bridge. Journal of wind engineering, 1997, 67&68: 239–252Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Larsen A, Walther J H. Aeroelastic analysis of bridge girder sections based on discrete vortex simulations. Journal of wind engineering, 1997, 67&68: 253–265Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Tran D A. Numerical Investigation into the Suppression Mechanism of Vortex-Induced Vibration for Box Girder in the Presence of Flap. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Yokohama: Urban Innovation Faculty, Yokohama National University, 2014Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Facchinetti M L, de Langre E, Biolley F. Vortex-induced travelling waves along a cable. European Journal of Mechanics-B/Fluids, 2004, 23(1): 199–208zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Van Dien J P. Fatihue Resistant Design of Cantilevered Sign, Signal, and Luminaire Support Structures. Master Thesis, Pennsylvania: Lehigh University, 1995Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Bourguet R, Karniadakis G E, Triantafyllou M S. Lock-in of the vortex-induced vibrations of a long tensioned beam in shear flow. Journal of Fluids and Structures, 2011, 27(5-6): 838–847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Asyikin M T. CFD Simulation of Vortex Induced Vibration of a Cylindrical Structure. Master Thesis, Trondheim: Department of Civil and Transport Engineering. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2012Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Zhang X. Aeroelastic Analysis of Super Long Cable-Supported Bridges. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Nanyang: School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 2003Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Adelino V L, Cunha A, Simoes L M C. CFD based Evaluation of the Lock-in Phenomenon of a Bridge under Wind. III European Conference on Computational Mechanics, Solids, Structures and Coupled Problems in Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, June 5–8, 2006Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Andersson C, Ahl D. Fluid Structure Interaction Evaluation of two coupling techniques. Master Thesis, Halmstad: School of Information Science, Computer and Electrical Engineering, Halmstad University, 2011Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Gale J. Fluid-Structure Interaction for simulations of fast transients. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Ljubljana: Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, University of Ljubljana, 2008Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Hassler M. Quasi-Static Fluid-Structure Interactions Based on a Geometric Description of Fluids. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Karlsruhe: Faculty of Civil Engineering, Geo-and Environmental Sciences, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 2009Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Hansen M S. Boundary Conditions for 3D Fluid-Structure Interaction Simulations of Compliant Vessels. Master Thesis, Trondheim: Department of Structural Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2013Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Ren H, Zhuang X, Cai Y, Rabczuk T. Dual-Horizon Peridynamics. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2016, 453–474Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Structural Mechanics, Faculty of Civil EngineeringBauhaus University WeimarWeimarGermany

Personalised recommendations