Motion-Dependent Forces on Streamlined Bridge Girders and Their Influencing Parameters – Observations from Wind Tunnel Buffeting Response Data

  • J. B. JakobsenEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 27)


Aerodynamic stability of long-span bridges is most readily examined in the frequency domain, with self-excited forces modelled as linearized functions of the bridge velocities and displacements. The present paper briefly recalls the experimental approaches to characterize the motion-dependent forces, and further explores the validity of superposition of the linearized load components, in presence of various influencing parameters. Flutter derivatives obtained with section models of two streamlined bridge girders in ambient vibrations are revisited. Emphasis is placed on the influence of the twisting to vertical frequency ratio and the type of the participating degrees of freedom on the identified wind-structure interaction. A novel aspect of the analysis of the buffeting response data is also attempted, in order to isolate the significance of the twisting amplitude on the self-excited wind forces in ambient vibrations.


Flutter derivatives Wind tunnel investigation Section model System identification Response amplitude Frequency ratio Buffeting response 



The author is grateful to a number of colleagues who developed and conducted the wind tunnel studies revisited in this work: dr. Svend Ole Hansen and his wind tunnel team, Prof. Emeritus Erik Hjorth-Hansen from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, The Norwegian Public Administration represented by dr. Bjørn Isaksen, Prof. Rudiger Höffer and dr. Christian Neuhaus from the Ruhr University of Bochum, and Ass. Prof. Ove Mikkelsen from the University of Stavanger. Assistance of dr. Etienne Cheynet from the University of Stavanger in the manuscript preparation is also greatly appreciated.


  1. Bogunović Jakobsen J, Hjorth-Hansen E (1995) Determination of the aerodynamic derivatives by a system identification method. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 57:295–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chowdhury AG, Sarkar PP (2003) A new technique for identification of eighteen flutter derivatives using a three-degree-of-freedom section model. Eng Struct 25:1763–1772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Diana G, Resta F, Zasso A, Belloli M, Rocchi D (2004) Forced motion and free motion aeroelastic tests on a new concept dynamometric section model of the Messina suspension bridge. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 92:441–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Diana G, Rocchi D, Argentini T, Muggiasca S (2010) Aerodynamic instability of a bridge deck section model: linear and nonlinear approach to force modeling. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 98(6–7):363–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Falco M, Curami A, Zasso A (1992) Nonlinear effects in sectional model aeroelastic parameters identification. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 42:1321–1332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Flamand O, de la Foye A (2000) Aerodynamic derivatives of three bridge decks measured by the forced oscillation technique. In: Proceedings of 3rd European & African conference on wind engineering, Eindhoven, 2–6 July, pp 605–610Google Scholar
  7. Hansen SO, Lollesgaard M, Rex S, Jakobsen JB, Hjorth-Hansen E (2009) The Hardanger bridge: static and dynamic wind tunnel tests with a section model. Prepared for Norwegian Public Roads Administration, Revision 2, Svend Ole Hansen ApS (rev 0 in 2006)Google Scholar
  8. Hansen SO, Lollesgaard M, Rex S, Jakobsen JB, Hjorth-Hansen E (2007). The Brandangersundet bridge: static and dynamic wind tunnel tests with a section model. Prepared for Norwegian Public Roads Administration, Revision 1, Svend Ole Hansen ApSGoogle Scholar
  9. Jakobsen JB, Hjorth-Hansen E (2007) Arne Selberg’s formula for flutter in light of multi-modal flutter analysis. In: Proceedings of 12th international conference on wind engineering, Cairns, Australia, 1–6 July, pp 135–142Google Scholar
  10. Lee S, Kwon SD (2011) Effects of turbulence properties on bridge aerodynamics. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on wind engineering, Amsterdam, July 10–15Google Scholar
  11. Matsumoto M, Kobayashi Y, Niihara Y, Shirato H (1994) Flutter mechanism and its stabilization of bluff bodies. In: Wind engineering: retrospect and prospect, proceedings of the ninth international conference on wind engineering, January 1995. John Wiley Eastern, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  12. Mikkelsen O (2013) Modelling of wind loads and wind-induced response of a long-span bridge in time-domain. PhD thesis, University of StavangerGoogle Scholar
  13. Mikkelsen O, Jakobsen JB (2017) Aeroelastic response from indicial functions with a finite element model of a suspension bridge. In: IOP conference series: materials science and engineering, vol 276, no 1, pp 1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Neuhaus CH, Roesler S, Höffer R, Hortmanns M, Zahlten W (2009) Identification of 18 flutter derivatives by forced vibration tests – a new experimental rig. In: Proceedings of the 5th european conference on wind engineering, 19–23 July. Firenze University Press, Firenze, pp 361–364Google Scholar
  15. Noda M, Utsunomiya M, Nagao F, Kanda M, Shiraishi N (2003) Effects of oscillation amplitude on aerodynamic derivatives. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 91(1–2):101–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sarkar PP, Jones NP, Scanlan RH (1994) Identification of aeroelastic parameters of flexible bridges. J Eng Mech 120(8):1719–1741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sarkar PP, Caracoglia L, Haan FL, Sato H, Murakoshi J (2009) Comparative and sensitivity study of flutter derivatives of selected bridge deck sections, part 1: analysis of inter-laboratory experimental data. Eng Struct 31(1):158–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Scanlan RH, Sabzevari A (1969) Experimental aerodynamic coefficients in the analytical study of suspension bridge flutter. J Mech Eng Sci 11(3):234–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Scanlan RH (1992) Wind dynamics of long-span bridges. In: Larsen A (ed) Aerodynamics of large bridges: proceedings of the first international symposium on aerodynamics of large bridges, Copenhagen, 19–21 February. BalkemaGoogle Scholar
  20. Selberg A (1961) Oscillation and aerodynamic stability of suspension bridges. Acta Poytech Scand 13Google Scholar
  21. Selberg A, Hjorth-Hansen E (1977) The fate of flat plate aerodynamics in the world of bridge decks. In: Proceedings of the theodorsen colloquim. Universitetsforlaget, OsloGoogle Scholar
  22. Siedziako B, Øiseth O, Rønnquist A (2017) An enhanced forced vibration rig for wind tunnel testing of bridge deck section models in arbitrary motion. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 64:152–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Poulsen NK, Damsgaard A, Reinhold TA (1992) Determination of flutter derivatives for the great belt bridge. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 41(1–3):153–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ukeguchi N, Sakata H, Nishitani H (1966) An investigation of aeroelastic stability of suspension bridges. In: Proceedings from the international symposium on suspension bridges, pp 79–100Google Scholar
  25. Wang Q (2015) Study on nonlinear motion-induced aerodynamic force of streamline box girder under different harmonic motions using forced vibration test (2015). In: 14th international conference on wind engineering, Porto Alegre, June 21–26. Conference presentation and personal communicationGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Structural and Mechanical Engineering and Material SciencesUniversity of StavangerStavangerNorway

Personalised recommendations