Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 48 (1993) 261-285 Elsevier

261

Aerodynamic aspects of the final design of the 1624 m suspension bridge across the Great Belt
Allan Larsen

COWIconsult, Consulting Engineers and Planners A/S Parallelvej 15, 2800 Lyngby, Denmark

Summary Long span suspension bridges are flexible structures which are highly sensitive to the action of the wind, hence aerodynamic performance often becomes a governing factor in the design process. The magnitude of the East Bridge, a 3 span suspension bridge of span lengths 535, 1624 and 535 m, has warranted an aerodynamic design process which involves stateof-the-art model testing and analytical procedures. The present paper focuses on the use of wind tunnel test results in the design of the East Bridge. Particular attention is given to the strategy adopted for wind tunnel testing, and to selected results obtained. Considerations for the bridge in service cover aerodynamic stability, dynamic wind loads and vortex shedding response of the girder. For the erection phase aerodynamic stability of the girder is treated in some detail.

1. The East Bridge

The E a s t Bridge, w h i c h will c a r r y a four lane h i g h w a y across the E a s t e r n c h a n n e l of the G r e a t Belt, consists of two multi-span beam type a p p r o a c h bridges l e a d i n g to a cable s u p p o r t e d m a i n bridge w h i c h spans the n a v i g a t i o n c h a n n e l . O u t l i n e bridge design i n c l u d i n g risk studies of the ship traffic en r o u t e to and from the Baltic r e g i o n has identified a s u s p e n s i o n bridge of 1624 m m a i n span as a feasible s t r u c t u r e for safe c r o s s i n g of the i n t e r n a t i o n a l shipping channel. The design w o r k has identified a cable sag to m a i n span r a t i o of 1/9 as being e c o n o m i c a l l y favourable, but a h i g h l y flexible s t r u c t u r e results. The suspension bridge is a r r a n g e d with an i n n o v a t i v e s t a t i c a l m a i n system w h i c h allows the girder to be c o n t i n u o u s over the full cable s u p p o r t e d l e n g t h of 2694 m i.e. w i t h o u t e x p a n s i o n joints at the pylons. In addition to service benefits the

Correspondence to: Dr. Allan Larsen, COWIconsult, Consulting Engineers and Planners A/S Parallelvej 15, 2800 Lyngby, Denmark.
016%6105/93/$06.00 1993 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. All rights reserved.

262

A. Larsen/ Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

Statical Main System

Classical Long Span Concept ( 3 span, 2 hinge )

,/
N

East Bridge ( Continuous Girder, Central Tie )

Fig. 1. Statical main system of the East Bridge compared to a classical suspension bridge.

longitudinal movements due to traffic and lateral deflections due to wind loading are reduced as compared to the traditional three span two-hinged configuration. A rigid central clamp between the main cable and girder combined with hydraulic restraint of "fast" longitudinal girder movements at the anchorages is arranged in order to minimize wear in expansion joints due to traffic and wind (Fig. 1). Experience gained from Danish bridges reveals t hat construction and maintenance costs are considerably lower for box girders than for plate or truss girders of equal load carrying capacity. Hence a box girder concept was introduced from the start of the East Bridge design project. The external shape of the box girder is chosen in order to combine structural requirements with adequate aerodynamic performance (Fig. 2). The strategy for tendering of the East Bridge called for development of an elaborate tender project. Outline designs and tender design studies initiated in 1989, were entrusted to a joint venture with COWIconsult as leading partner, B. Hejlund Rasmussen and Rambell & H a n n e m a n n (CBR). The East Bridge project was submitted for tender in May 1990 and bids were received just before new year 1990/1991. Steel and concrete construction contracts were awarded in October 1991 for immediate start of works. The contract for detailed design of the bridge was awarded to the CBR joint venture at the same time. The East Bridge is scheduled to open for traffic in 1997.

A. Larsen/Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

263
254.1

Great Belt East Bridge

Main Particulars:
Main Span Length Side Span Length Cable Sag Cable Spacing Cable Area ( one cable ) Girder Width Girder Depth Girder Mass (incl. cable ) Girder Mass Moment of Inertia (incl. cable ) I m = 1624 m I s = 535 rn d 180 m 2a = 27.0 rn A c = 0.44 m 2 B = 31.0 m D = 4.4 m m = 22.74* 103 kg/rn I = 2.47 * 106kgrn2/m
=

27.0 m r ~ ~ E . 1

/ J

31.0 rn

/ ~L

BOX Girder Cross Section

Pylon

5350m

1824m

l,

535.0m

Elevation

Fig. 2. General arrangement of the Great Belt East Bridge.

2. D e s i g n

basis - wind climate

at site

The wind climate and design assumptions applicable to bridge structures in Denmark are given in the Danish code of practice (DS 410.3, 1982). 10 min mean and gust wind speeds U10, Us applicable to assessment of wind loads are inferred from a systematic wind monitoring program conducted over a seven year period for 3 different locations in Denmark (Jensen, Franck [1]). These measurements were, for practical reasons, restricted to registration of peak dynamic head of gusts using a specially designed manometer of unknow n time constant. A possible implication of the measurement strategy and later interpretation in relation to establishment of the Danish code is t hat the ratio of the gust wind speed to the mean wind speed is found to be Ug/Ulo=I.13 at 70 m level over open terrain, as opposed to Ug/U~o=l.39 in the British code of practice (BS 5400, 1978). Denmark and parts of Britain are situated at the same latitude and are subjected to similar wind conditions dominated by North Atlantic cyclones. Hence the apparent discrepancy is likely to be found in the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the wind measurements. A comprehensive wind monitoring program was established in order to acquire detailed information on the wind climate at the bridge site and update the design basis provided by the code of practice. 10 min mean wind speeds, directions and air t e m per a t ur e have been acquired for 9 consecutive years from a 70 m high meteorological tower corresponding to the future level of the

264

A. Larsen/ Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

bridge girder. Mean wind data have been supplemented by gust recordings for the past 5 years and by measurements of turbulence spectra for the past 2 years. Recently measurements of the vertical and along-wind components of the lateral coherence of turbulence have been completed using a second meteorological tower erected 40 m east of the old tower on the small island of Sprogo. The terrain at the bridge site is found to be aerodynamically smooth characterized by a roughness length z0 of approximately 0.003 m. Turbulence levels

S~t-ogo: I n t e n s i t i e s

lu for Wind D i r e c t i o n s

300

50 and

120 2 3 0 I)eg

o
01

hi9 0
0{')1

~
00 5 00 10 00

o o[

o Oo

0 O01 15 00 20 00 25 00

U
gl,lO~

/s
nltfl

INle.~iliP~ Iw f~,l" I~'iiHI IIi~('('Iions :100 50

I;~0 ~'10 1)~'~

OI
H-

O
~) (ii

Q(}DI

I r i ~,,

,,,,

TI,

T~r

r t w T~

rT

~ TT~

FT~T~F~1

~r

FI~

T1

~]11

0 (]()

5 00

10 00

[I

~n/s

15 00

20 00

25 ()()

Fig. 3. Along-wind (u) and cross-wind vertical (w) turbulence intensities measured in
Northerly and Southerly wind directions normal to the bridge line.

A. Larsen/Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

265

are relatively low reaching 8-10% in high winds. For wind speeds below 20 m/s turbulence levels as low as 1% may be encountered as indicated in Fig. 3. Measured power spectra of along-wind and vertical components are found to be in good agreement with empirical models for atmospheric turbulence (Kaimal type model), although some variability is found at very low frequencies which are of little importance in bridge design. Reference is made to Fig. 4. Measurements of the lateral coherence of the wind field were not completed during the tender design of the bridge. The empirical exponential formulation

I lill[l

i llllli

I ]I11~

SPROGO, s e c t o r

.~: sl R+ U
2: S! R3 U I: 51 R2 U -1

10 o

.J

10-I

10-2 10 -+

+ ,,~i~i

'[II

'

'

I I'PI

10-z

10 -1 10 0 FREQUENCY
l k i ]IIIII I I j iiII~I I

101

10

i0 t

IIII

SPROGO, s e c t o r

1, W - c o m p o n e n t

3:$1

R4 W

2:$1 R"~ W lO 0
1:$1 R2 W O: St R1 W

10-2 -~ 10

10

-2

1 10 0 FREQUENCY

0-1

10

'':P

10

Fig. 4. P o w e r spectra of a l o n g - w i n d (u) and cross-wind v e r t i c a l (w) t u r b u l e n c e measured in N o r t h e r ] y and S o u t h e r l y w i n d s n o r m a l to the bridge fine. Dashed fine: " K a i m a ] " mode], F u l l - l i n e : new " H o j s t r u p " mode].

266 Table 1

A. Larsen/ Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

Design wind speeds U10 and U, at 70 m level predicted for a 100 year return period East Bridge U,o (m/s) 38.9 U, (m/s) 49.8 DS 410.3 U,o (m/s) 42.2 U~ (m/s) 47.7

Table 2 Turbulence properties, adopted for East Bridge design basis Along-wind turbulence intensity Vertical turbulence intensity Factor in length scale, along-wind Factor in length scale, vertical Exponential decay factor I. Iw ).. w a 10% 6% 20 2 8

for c o h e r e n c e was adopted for design purposes assuming a c o m m o n decay c o n s t a n t a for v e r t i c a l and along-wind components. A s u m m a r y of key wind p a r a m e t e r s adopted for t e n d e r design of the E a s t Bridge is given in Table 1, and w h e r e appropriate, c o m p a r e d to c o r r e s p o n d i n g values o b t a i n e d from the Danish code of practice. P o w e r spectral densities adopted for along-wind and cross-wind vertical t u r b u l e n c e are of the K a i m a l form:

fS,.~,(f) 2 2 I,.wUlo
where

X
( l + l . 5 X ) ~/3' (1)

X_)~ .... z f
U10

at level z

(2)

The D a v e n p o r t e x p o n e n t i a l form for along-wind and vertical c o h e r e n c e of t u r b u l e n c e is adopted for design calculations: Coh(f, Ax)= e x p ( - 2 a f A x ~ Ulo / (3)

where f is the frequency, and Ax is the s e p a r a t i o n of r e f e r e n c e stations along the bridge axis. N u m e r i c a l c o n s t a n t s r e l a t i n g to the t u r b u l e n c e properties are given in Table 2.

A. Larsen/Aerodynamic aspects of the final design 3. D e s i g n r e q u i r e m e n t s - a e r o d y n a m i c p e r f o r m a n c e

267

The objective of aerodynamic analysis and wind tunnel testing of the East Bridge is to ensure, with a high degree of confidence, t hat the bridge concept is s t r u c tu r ally adequate to meet prescribed requirements for service life and user proficiency. During design it is thus important to make sure t hat wind induced stresses are below allowable levels, and t ha t fatigue life and comfort criteria are not violated. This task is accomplished by exposing the bridge concept to a set of conservative wind loads which encompasses the range of conditions anticipated for the service life of the bridge. The aerodynamic problems which have received particular attention during outline and tender design of the East Bridge are: (i) Aerodynamic instability - flutter - which, if allowed to develop, is likely to destroy the bridge, or will demand major repair or retrofit work. (ii) Buffeting which may induce sizable time varying stresses in a flexible bridge s tr u ctu r e at high winds. (iii) Vortex shedding excitation which may occur at low wind speeds often encountered in service. Thus vortex induced oscillations may be a source of wear, fatigue damage and user discomfort.

3.1. Aerodynamic stability and assessment Aerodynamic stability is an item of par t i c ul a r concern. If allowed to occur, it is likely to cause i nt er r upt i on of the road link for a long period of time. Thus a very low acceptable probability p < 10- 7/yr. has been assigned to realization of this event. A probabilistic study has been u n d e r t a k e n in order to identify the critical wind speed U below which section models must be stable in order to meet this criterion (Ostenfeld-Rosenthal et al. [2]). Table 3 compares the flutter wind speed adapted for the East Bridge to flutter wind speeds obtained from proposed British design rules (BS 5400 Appendix E, 1986 [3]) and the revised code adopted by H o n s h u - S h i k o k u Bridge Authority, J a p a n (Miyata et al. [4]). In order to ensure a certain robustness in design, the criterion is specified to be met at - 3, 0 and + 3 of incidence between the deck section chord and the mean wind direction.

Table 3 Criteria for flutter wind speeds Uc referred to wind conditions applicable to the East Bridge
(m/s)

East Bridge (P< 10- ~/yr) BS 5400 Appendix E Honshu Shikoku 1990

60 59 52

268

A. Larsen/ Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

Aerodynamic stability of bridge deck sections is commonly obtained from model tests in wind tunnels, but predictions by means of "flat plate" theory may be quite successful for well designed trapezoidal box sections displaying 2 DOF coupled flutter. In these cases a quick estimate of the flutter wind speed may be obtained using the Selberg formula (Selberg, Hjort-Hansen [5]). Critical wind speeds obtained in this way are often used as a figure of merit for comparison with measured flutter wind speeds.
3.2. B u f f e t i n g loads a n d assessment

Buffeting actions on a flexible bridge structure are usually found to be of minor importance at low but frequent Wind speeds. Buffeting becomes increasingly pronounced with increasing mean wind speeds. A power law relation U 2"s3 may often be assumed as a rough rule of thumb. As a consequence, evaluation of stress levels at design wind speed becomes more important than assessment of fatigue life, but evaluation of motion levels relative to user comfort criteria should not be forgotten. Several analytical, experimental and hybrid techniques are available for evaluation of buffeting induced stresses in a bridge structure: (i) Direct measurement of strains on a physical model subjected to turbulent wind. (ii) Calculation of stresses by means of a dynamic FEM model subjected to simulated wind loads in the time domain. (iii) Calculation of peak stress levels by means of a FEM model subjected to a suitable combination of static and dynamic wind loads derived from experiments and statistical buffeting analyses. The latter approach has been adopted for the design of the East Bridge using the finite element based buffeting routine DYNWIND developed by COWIconsult.
3.3. Vortex s h e d d i n g excitation a n d assessment

Vortex shedding excitation of bridges occurs when the frequency of vortices shed in the wake of solid bluff girders coincides with one of the natural frequencies of the bridge structure. Due to the relatively low natural frequencies of the East Bridge, vortex shedding excitation is expected to take place at low wind speeds, between 4 and 15 m/s typically. This wind speed range is encountered frequently at the bridge site, hence evaluation of wind actions in relation to the design must focus on fatigue life, wear in joints and bearings and on user comfort. While assessment of fatigue life is handled according to a set of well established specifications for design of steel structures, the assessment of comfort is not a standard item considered in bridge design. For the East Bridge it was decided to adopt the ISO guidelines for user proficiency (ISO-2631 Addendum E, 1978), according to which the maximum acceptable rms (root-mean-square) acceleration levels d corresponding to 1.5 m/s z for vertical motions at frequencies below 1 Hz.

A. Larsen/Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

269

The design problem at hand is to determine the exact wind speeds for "lock-in" between rhythmic vortex shedding and natural frequencies of the structure, and then establish amplitudes of the resulting motions. This problem is commonly addressed through wind tunnel testing of aeroelastic models in turbulent and smooth flow. General analytical procedures which allow determination of the vortex shedding frequency and response amplitudes during "lock-in" are not available, but the proposed British design rules (BS 5400 Appendix E, 1986 [3]) offers empirical expressions for vertical and torsional response of bridge girders subjected to vortex shedding excitation.

4. Strategy for wind t u n n e l testing of the East Bridge

As indicated above, almost all aerodynamic analyses of long span bridges must at some point rely on results obtained from wind tunnel testing of scale models of the bridge structure. With this in mind, a strategy was developed for commissioning of wind tunnel tests and application of test results during development of the bridge concept and in the later design phases. The strategy called for initiation of progressively more complex tests, as more design details became "frozen". The purpose of the wind tunnel test program was twofold: (i) Wind tunnel test results were to be directly applicable in the design process. (ii) Wind tunnel test results should enhance the understanding of wind actions on the East Bridge and thus provide means for "calibration" of analytical procedures to be used in connection with design calculations.
4.1. Section model tests

During development of the concept for the East Bridge, 1:80 scale section model tests (Fig. 5) were conducted in smooth and turbulent flow in order to establish the flutter performance of candidate section designs and obtain steady state wind load coefficients for analytical assessment of stress levels and response to turbulent wind. Measurements were carried out in smooth and turbulent flow with emphasis on turbulent flow results, (Damsg~rd et al. [6]). Stability tests in smooth flow were supplemented by decay tests for measurement of the aerodynamic damping associated with vertical and torsional motions. These tests provided a basis for evaluation of the conventional quasi-steady expressions for aerodynamic damping employed in the buffeting routine utilized for design calculations. The girder cross section chosen for tender design of the East Bridge was subjected to an additional test series. The objective was to obtain buffeting response curves in turbulent flow reproducing the vertical turbulence intensity and power spectral density specified in the design basis. Aerodynamic derivatives were measured in smooth flow using a novel system identification technique. The Objective of these tests was to obtain

270

A. Larsen/Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

Fig. 5. 1:80 scale section models, East Bridge wind tunnel tests (Curtesy Danish Maritime Institute, DMI).

e x p e r i m e n t a l d a t a needed for a n a l y t i c a l e v a l u a t i o n of the a e r o d y n a m i c stability of the bridge girder d u r i n g erection. All section model tests were performed in the wind t u n n e l facilities of the Danish M a r i t i m e Institute, D e n m a r k (Poulsen, et al. [7]). 4.2. Taut strip model tests Before t e n d e r i n g of the E a s t Bridge with its world r e c o r d span, it was deemed a p p r o p r i a t e to obtain a "second o p i n i o n " on the a e r o d y n a m i c p e r f o r m a n c e of the bridge. The main purpose was to exclude any systematic errors in the section model tests which could h a v e lead to an e r r o n e o u s p e r c e p t i o n of the feasibility of the bridge c o n c e p t to be tendered. Section models do not allow faithful r e p r o d u c t i o n of all aspects to be considered in order to obtain a broad e x p e r i m e n t a l verification of the a e r o d y n a m i c p e r f o r m a n c e of a bridge. P a r t i c u l a r s h o r t c o m i n g s of section models are: (i) The response is r e s t r i c t e d to two rigid body modes, one v e r t i c a l and one torsional, devoid of the real structure. (ii) Vertical turbulence, which d e t e r m i n e s vertical and t o r s i o n a l response, will be c o r r e l a t e d over a m u c h s h o r t e r girder lengths t h a n for the real structure.

A. Larsen/Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

271

(iii) Possible effects of "long wave" longitudinal turbulence cannot be established due to the inability of "small" wind tunnels to reproduce large scale turbulence. In view of the shortcomings of section model tests it was decided to introduce the taut strip model in the program for confirmatory tender design tests. Taut strip models usually simulate the main span of the bridge to be tested and allow for a large number of sinusoidal mode shapes to participate in the response to turbulent wind. The geometrical scale of 1 : 300 chosen for the East Bridge model allowed a faithful simulation of the atmospheric boundary layer at the bridge site. Free response tests were conducted in order to establish the girder response to turbulence and measure the critical wind speed for onset of flutter. Forced vibration tests were conducted in order to measure aerodynamic derivatives in turbulent flow and obtain experimental evidence for the spanwise and cordwise correlations of turbulence and fluctuating aerodynamic forces. Correlations between incident turbulence and associated aerodynamic loads are needed in analytical assessments of buffeting loads. The East Bridge taut strip tests were conducted in the large boundary layer wind tunnel at the University of Western Ontario, Canada (Davenport et al. [8]). 4.3. Full bridge model tests Taut strip models simulate the dynamics of beam-like structures accurately, i.e. natural frequencies are integer multiples of the fundamental mode. This is

Fig. 6. 1:200 scale full aeroelastic bridge model, East Bridge wind tunnel tests (Curtesy Danish Maritime Institute, DMI).

272
Lateral Sway

A. Larsen/Aerodynamica~ectsofthefinaldesign
Vertical Bending Torsion

'I '\

1 mode

0.052 Hz

1 mode

0.100 Hz

1 mode:

0.278 Hz

2 mode

0.123 Hz

2 mode:

0.115 Hz

2 mode:

0.383 Hz

3 mode

0.187 Hz

3 mode

0.135 Hz

3 mode

0.502 Hz

Fig. 7. Natural frequencies and mode shapes for the lowest three lateral, vertical and torsional modes of oscillation for the East Bridge.

n o t the case for s u s p e n s i o n bridges as i n d i c a t e d in Fig. 7. T h e h e a v y m a i n cables h a v e an a p p r e c i a b l e influence on the d y n a m i c s of the s t r u c t u r e , h e n c e n a t u r a l f r e q u e n c i e s for modes of i n t e r e s t are g r o u p e d in a r e l a t i v e l y n a r r o w f r e q u e n c y b a n d s as c o m p a r e d to the simple b e a m s t r u c t u r e .

A. Larsen/Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

273

The tender design developed for the East Bridge was accepted for construction in the spring of 1991. In view of the particular dynamic features of suspension bridges in general, and the innovative statical main system and the very long continuous box girder from anchor block to anchor block in the East Bridge, it was decided to commission a series of full bridge model tests for verification of structural adequacy. The full bridge model tests use a 1 : 200 scale aeroelastic model (Fig. 6) of the complete bridge structure. The selected model scale necessitated construction of a purpose built 14 m wide wind tunnel at the Danish Maritime Institute (Wagner Smitt, Brinch [9]). Provisions were made for testing of the influence of the axial constraints at the anchor blocks and the torsional restraints at the pylons. The full bridge model has been tested under smooth and turbulent flow, and under yawed winds relative to the bridge axis. The test program was initiated in December 1991. Final reporting and evaluation of test results are currently in progress.
5. A e r o d y n a m i c performance - b r i d g e in s e r v i c e

The previous discussion has focused on the motivation for carrying out wind tunnel tests, and the strategy adopted in connection with the design of the Great Belt East Bridge. This section will present selected results obtained from the various types of testing employed. 5.1. Mean wind loading Steady state wind load coefficients measured on a 1:80 scale section model and 1 : 300 scale cladding elements of the taut strip model of the chosen section (H9.1) are presented in Fig. 8. Satisfactory agreement is demonstrated between steady state wind loads obtained from models of different size, indicating that Reynolds number effects are of minor importance in the present case. It is noted that the wind loading is more than doubled if the bridge girder is fitted with 2.4 m high wind screens of 50% porosity, section H9.2. The wind screens also lead to tripling of the vertical wind loading. Preliminary results obtained from the full bridge model tests give an impression of the lateral deflection due to mean wind loading on the East Bridge. Figure 9 reveals a lateral deflection of 1.7 m at midspan at a wind speed of 37.6 m/s just below the design wind speed of 38.9 m/s. The measured deflection should be compared to a predicted lateral deflection of 2.1 m obtained from FEM calculations. 5.2. Aerodynamic stability A first estimate of the aerodynamic stability of the box girder designs drawn up for the East Bridge was obtained from section model tests in smooth and turbulent flow. More than 16 variations of the trapezoidal box section were tested in order to establish the influence of geometrical modifications of section depth, edge

274

A. Larsen/ Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

Steady - State Wind Load Coefficients

Designation I "~"[ ,,~ I Cross Section Uft CLO I Lift Slope dCL/dC~ Moment CMO Morn.Slope dC M/dC~ Drag CDO Comments:

H9.1

0.067

4.37

0.028

1.17

0.57

Turbulent Flow 1:80 Scale

.9:O_ ; ~ . o .
- 0.050 4.41 0.013 0.93 0.59 Turbulent Flow 1:300 Scale

H9.1

r
I

H9.2 I

- 0.18

4.35

- 0.012

117

1.21

Turbulent Flow 1:80 Scale Wind Screens

Fig. 8. Steady state wind load coefficients for the East Bridge girder obtained from section model and taut strip tests.

Lateral deflection (m) ~*, U = 65.8 m / s

/\

Fig. 9. Lateral deflection of the East Bridge H9.1 section in turbulent wind full bridge model tests. configurations and steepness of side wall slopes on the aerodynamic stability. I t is o b s e r v e d t h a t t h e f i n e r d e t a i l s o f t h e b o x g e o m e t r y o n l y h a v e a m i n o r e f f e c t o n t h e f l u t t e r p e r f o r m a n c e ( F i g . 10). W i n d s c r e e n s 2.4 m h i g h o f 50% p o r o s i t y a n d l i f t e d 0.6 m a b o v e t h e c r o w n o f t h e r o a d w a y is s e e n t o h a v e a d i s t i n c t

A. Larsen/Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

275

Critical Wind Speeds Uo for onset of Flutter

Designation Cross Section

Uc meas Flow Desig(3cE6ib~ Condition nation

Cross Section

Uc meas Flow Uc~ Condition

H1.1

L~.o~

I 1.o4
9.o J,
..... I

Smooth

H5.1 ' ~:

!i!i!i!ill

1.03 0.93

Smooth Turbulent

H1.2 I ~

1.03

Smooth

H6.1

_'r '

~' '

.......... ~ ]

1.05 0.94

Smooth Turbulent

965
1.11 0,96
Smooth Turbulent

1 5t5
I 1.03 0.95
Smooth Turbulent

H3.1

H7.1

I ~ 3.0 ~ ~2.0

73
, :F

7.7
,

H4.1

J, I 9o

1.00 0.95

Smooth Turbulent

0.99 ~, l 9.5 ~ 6.0 ~ 0.94

Smooth Turbulent

'~ ~"""""'-~_ j~ 9.0

R -- 2:5 J~--6~-]~-

0.98

Turbulent Wind Screen Added

0.78 ~ 9.5 L 60 ~
Turbulent

Fig. 10. Critical wind speed for onset of aerodynamic instability for selected girder cross sections given as fraction of the predicted by means of Selberg's formula. Section model tests performed in smooth and turbulent flow at 0 incidence.

influence on the aerodynamic stability for the section c h o s e n for detailed design (H9.2). Turbulence is seen to have a slightly destabilizing effect, possibly due to the vertical fluctuating velocity component. Figure 11 offers a plot of the aerodynamic stability of the final section superimposed on the flutter b o u n d a r y specified in the design basis. The stability criterion is generally met with a comfortable margin for the H9.1 section w i t h o u t wind screens. In the case that wind screens are fitted, section H9.2, the aerodynamic stability criterion is just met w h e n judged from the results of the section model tests. Evidence of the critical wind speed for onset of flutter was also obtained from taut strip and full bridge model tests. Table 4 compares stability limits for the bridge w i t h o u t wind screens, inferred from all types of tests. Included is also a comparison of the critical wind speed predicted from a stability analysis based on aerodynamic derivatives extracted from section model and taut strip tests. Table 4 indicates that each of the test methods leads to a fairly consistent estimate for the flutter wind speed.

276

A. Larsen/ Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

Uc(m/s)

50 Wind (~) H9.1 40 Turbulent Flow 30 1No Wind Screen /k H9.2 t 20 Struc. Damping ReL to Critical (s ~ 0.002 10 Wind Screen Added Nose Down Nose Up Iw= 6.5%

-'2

;,

Q. ( deg ]

Fig. 11. Aerodynamic stability of final sections H9.1 and H9.2. From section model tests.

Table 4 Flutter wind speeds Uc for the East Bridge obtained from section model, taut strip and full bridge wind tunnel tests. Section H9.1 without wind screens Type of test critical wind speed U, (m/s) 70 74 ~ 72 70 75 75 79

Direct measurements. Section model Taut strip Full bridge Predictions, aerodynamic derivatives ( AD) : Section model ADs Taut strip ADs

5.3. B u f f e t i n g action An impression of the buffeting response of the East Bridge to turbulent wind is o b t a i n e d f r o m F i g . 12 w h i c h i l l u s t r a t e s t h e p e a k l a t e r a l r e s p o n s e o f t h e E a s t Bridge as measured in full bridge model wind tunnel tests and calculated by finite element methods.

A. Larsen/ Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

0.00

277

-.'n n~
+

-',ti-a -O.lO

,,b -F

mmin
-F -F IN

t.u a E Z m -0.20 LU O

5 Q_
5
5~

< -0.30uJ 13_

H9.1 FULL B, NO WSC -IH9.2 FULL B, WSC H9.2 DYNWlND DB [] H9.2 DYNWlND FULL B

-F

-0.40 0 20 40 WIND SPEED [M/S] 60 80

Fig. 12. Lateral peak response of the East Bridge with wind screens (section H9.2) and without wind screens (section H9.1).

The lateral peak response of the bridge girder to turbulent wind is proportional to the drag wind loading on the girder, hence the presence of wind screens is expected to approximately double the lateral response. Reference is made to the steady state drag coefficients presented in Fig. 8 for the girder section with and without wind screens. Figure 12, which compares lateral peak responses (mean and dynamic components) measured on the full bridge model, confirms this expectation. Theoretical calculations of the lateral peak response at the design wind speed of 38.9 m/s, are in good agreement with the measurements if based on the wind conditions measured in the wind tunnel. This indicates that the theoretical wind load model used in the design is adequate. Response calculations using design basis wind parameters leads to somewhat higher lateral peak responses of the bridge girder than obtained from the full bridge model tests. Wind load and response calculations using wind parameters established in the design basis (section 2) forms the basis for the steel design of the bridge girder as outlined in section 5.5 below. 5.4. Vortex shedding action The dominating vortex shedding action on the East Bridge is found mainly in vertical modes. Section model and full bridge model tests have identified

278

A. Larsen/Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

vertical vortex shedding excitation to occur at non-dimensional wind speeds in the range 1 < U/fB< 1.4 where B is the width of the bridge girder. Pronounced vortex shedding is observed mainly under smooth flow conditions and at low levels of structural damping of ~ 1% logarithmic decrement. Vortex shedding excitation diminishes under turbulence levels typical for the site and at structural damping levels of ~ 3% logarithmic decrement, typical for long span suspension bridges. Figure 13 compares vertical vortex shedding responses measured in section model tests and full bridge model tests (8th mode of vibration) for the bridge girder without wind screens, section H9.1, and at a structural damping level of ~ 2%. Assessment of the vortex shedding excitation using the empirical method devised by the British code of practice is included for comparison. The tests results given in Fig. 13 indicate that vortex shedding excitation of the 8th vertical mode of the prototype bridge (eigen frequency of 0.39 Hz) may occur in the wind speed range 12 16 m/s. Rms acceleration levels d may range between 0.6 and 2.2 m/s 2 and may thus violate the comfort criterion which establishes maximum acceptable rms acceleration levels of 1.5 m/s< Firm conclusions on the vortex induced response magnitudes of the bridge cannot be drawn due to uncertainties concerning possible Reynolds number effects in full

0.1 H9.1 FULL B 8 MODE tI (.9 "1O uJ D 0.06 u.I u.I (9

o_ 9
123

H9.1 FULL B 7 MODE 0.08BS5400 DA: 1% BS5400 DA: 3% -><-H9.1 SECT M DA: 1% h9.1 SECT M DA: 3%

0.04~

0
In--

LU

> 0.0209 t"t"

i
0.5 1 1.5 N O N - D I M E N S I O N A L W I N D SPEED U/fB

Fig. 13. Vertical vortex shedding responses of the East Bridge w i t h o u t wind screens, section H9.1.

A. Larsen/Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

279

bridge model and due to inadequate knowledge of the prototype damping level. It was thus desirable to establish possible means for suppression of vortex shedding excitation. Section model tests carried out in connection with the design of the Little Belt bridge (Ostenfeld et al.) [10], has demonstrated t hat a set of guide vanes situated at the edges of the box girder may be effective in suppressing vortex shedding excitation. A somewhat similar set of guide vanes has been tested on a section model for the East Bridge and has been found to be a very effective means for suppression of vertical vortex shedding action. In contrast to the Little Belt Bridge, where the guide vanes are built as an integral part of the railings, guide vanes on the East Bridge section model were deployed along the bottom and lower side panel joints. This concept is illustrated in Fig. 14. Positioning of the guide vanes at the bottom of the box section ensures t hat the guide vanes will be effective when wind flow over the bridge deck is blocked by traffic queues. Guide vanes will not be fitted to the bridge girder from the opening of the East Bridge to traffic but, will be considered as an add-on retrofit measure to be installed if operational experience proves them necessary.

5.5. Effect of snow accumulation along railings Heavy snow falls are occasionally experienced at winter time at the Great Belt site. Hence the aerodynamic effect of snow accumulation along railings, either by n atu r al means or by snow ploughing, must be considered in an evaluation of wind effects on the East Bridge. Accumulation of snow walls along the railings will act aerodynamically much like New Jersey type crash barriers, i.e. they are expected to obstruct the free air flow over the deck and thus degrade the aerodynamic stability of the girder. I n t r o d u c t o r y section model tests revealed t hat the presence of snow walls along the railings lead to a critical wind speed for onset of flutter

Guide Vanes
Fig. 14. Guide vanes at bottom/side panel joints for suppression of vortex shedding response.

280

A.

Larsen/ Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

Uc = 43 m/s as c o m p a r e d to U = 70 m/s valid for the girder w i t h o u t s n o w accumulation. S e c t i o n m o d e l tests were c o n d u c t e d with full s n o w c o v e r a g e of the railings, but for the p r o t o t y p e bridge s n o w a c c u m u l a t i o n m a y be of different h e i g h t and i n t e n s i t y a l o n g the spans. M o r e realistic, but idealized s n o w c o n f i g u r a t i o n s as indicated in Fig. 15 w e r e tested in the full bridge model.

No Snow

Low Snow

High Snow

Padial Low Snow

Fig. 15. Snow configurations investigated in the full bridge wind tunnel tests.

10.00H9.1 NO SNOW C1 H9.1 PART LOW SNOW X H9.1 LOW SNOW H9.1 HIGH SNOW X 6.00-

,4
X

>.< X E

8.00(.9 !4J o.1 O)_ 3

IJ

,i

z O o') rr O F.-',,d
uJ [3-

E3 4.00 X

[]

i n n
2.00

L7

0.00 0

-mm,,h E
20 40 WIND SPEED [M/S] 60 80

Fig. 16. Torsional response of bridge girder for different snow accumulations along railings.

A. Larsen/Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

281

Selected results of the snow accumulation tests are given in Fig. 16. It is observed th at " h i gh" snow walls have got a pronounced influence on the torsional response as compared to the bridge girder without snow. At wind speeds below 40 m/s the buffeting response for the two cases are almost identical, but at 40 m/s the response for the girder with snow walls increases drastically and develops into a flutter instability in pure torsion. For cases with decreasing amounts of snow accumulation, the growing torsional response still develops into a pure torsional flutter instability, but the critical wind speed for the onset of the phenomenon increases. For the condition with "low" snow on 50% of the main span, the critical wind speed is much the same as for the H9.2 section fitted with wind screens. The experience gained from wind tunnel tests with the bridge girder including snow accumulation on the railings will be reflected in a set of instructions for snow removal, to be given in the maintenance manual for the East Bridge.

5.6. Effect of wind loading in steel design

S tr u ctu r al adequacy and reliability of the East Bridge is ensured by exposing the bridge concept to a set of conservative load assumptions which, with a high degree of confidence, encompasses the service conditions encountered

0+081

Legend :

Load
Combination A

Load
Combination B

Utilization Ratio Utilization Ratio OO(:3- arlow O- allow

Load Combination A : 1,0 x Dead Load Load Combination B : 1.0 x Dead Load

+ +

1 3 x Traffic Load 0.5 x Traffic Load

+ +

0.5 x Wind Load 1.3 x Wind Load

+ +

0.5 x Temperature Load 0.5 x Temperature Load

Fig. 17. Assessment of the importance of wind loading relative to other loading components considered in steel design of the East Bridge girder.

282

A. Larsen/Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

during the service life of the bridge. In order to emphasize the importance of wind loading in the steel design of the East Bridge girder, two load cases termed A and B are discussed. Each load case combines actions from dead load, traffic, wind and temperature, but contributions from traffic and wind loading are weighed differently as indicated in Figure 17. Figure 17 shows the calculated utilization ratio, i.e. the ratio of calculated stresses to allowable stresses at selected locations in the skin panels. It is noted that load case B which emphasizes the wind loading (static and dynamic) at the design wind speed of 38.9 m/s, leads to high utilization ratios as compared to loading case A which emphasizes the traffic load. Hence wind loading is a governing factor in the design of certain steel panels in the East Bridge girder.

6. Aerodynamic stability during erection

During erection of suspension bridges a number of special aerodynamic problems is encountered which relate to the fact that the bridge structure is incomplete, thus various structural components do not receive or render the kind of support intended in the complete structure. Erection of a suspension bridge may proceed in a number of different ways, and detailed aerodynamic considerations should address the particular scheme

16 %

20 %

16

Erection Scheme A

2O %
7

Erection Scheme B Fig. 18. Erection schemes considered.

A. Larsen/ Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

283

chosen by the contractor and preferably involve assessment of the effect of temporary supports, erection equipment and scaffolding. The designer is not necessarily involved in this process, but he still needs to consider erection problems in order to ensure that the bridge concept can be realized in a safe and satisfactory way. Of particular concern is the aerodynamic stability of the partially erected bridge girder.

6.1. Aerodynamic stability of the girder

The erection of suspension bridge box girders presents particular aerodynamic stability problems related to temporary lack of torsional continuity in combination with full exposure of the girder surfaces to the wind. Reduced mass loading on the main cables also contributes due to the resulting reduction in cable stiffness. Stability during erection was studied in some detail for the tender design of the East Bridge. Figure 19 quotes section model test results which illustrate the lowering of the critical wind speed for onset of flutter during erection. A particular stage of erection scheme A, shown in Fig. 18, is considered. It is observed that the critical wind speed drops from 70 m/s (Fig. 7) to 39-42 m/s depending on the structural damping level. The aerodynamic stability may be enhanced by

Uc(m/s)

70

60
,,xm = 4 t / m
50

( ~ ~ - 2

t/m
~40
Wind 30 Turbulent Flow Iw= 6 . 5 % Struc. Damping
20

Rel. to Critical s ~ 0.002

A 6 ~0.01

12.0 m Erection Scheme A Nose Down i 2 -

i -3

11 0

i 1

i 2

Nose Up i 3

~ O. ( deg )

Fig. 19. Stability of bridge girder during erection. Effect of eccentric mass loading on stability.

284 Table 5

A. Larsen/Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

Effect of erection scheme and provision of eccentric ballast on the critical wind speeds Uc for flutter during erection. Predictions based on aerodynamic derivatives (AD) obtained from section model tests and "flat plate" theory. Structural damping ~s= 0.01 relative to critical Eccentric mass Am (t/m) Erection scheme A 0 2 4 0 2 4 Measured AD's (m/s) 42.7 43.7 49.7 34.8 35.9 44.8 Flat plate AD's (m/s) 44.4 52.7 66.1 Experiment (m/s) 42.7

Erection scheme B

provision of eccentric ballast at the windward cable plane, a strategy adopted for erection of the Humber Bridge (Brancaleoni) [11]. The actual scheme adopted for deck erection is of importance to the aerodynamic stability as demonstrated in Table 5. When erection in the main span proceeds simultaneously from midspan and pylons (scheme A) the stiffness provided by the main cables will be larger as compared to the situation where deck erection proceeds from midspan only (scheme B) for the same girder length erected at midspan. Hence a higher critical wind speed for onset of flutter results. In connection with the stability analysis given in Table 5, it is of interest to notice the difference in critical wind speeds when predictions are based on measured aerodynamic derivatives and the theoretical "flat plate" counter parts. For the basic case without eccentric mass loading applied, predictions based on measured or "flat plate" AD's yield almost identical critical wind speeds. In the cases where eccentric mass loading is applied, the "flat plate" AD's tend to overestimate the critical wind speed by a substantial amount. The enhancement of aerodynamic stability predicted from measured AD's is supported by direct measurements as given in Fig. 19.

Acknowledgements
The au th o r would like to acknowledge the kind permission given by A/S Sorebaeltsforbindelsen to publish design considerations and wind tunnel test results obtained for the East Bridge. The dedication and support rendered my colleagues in the CBR design joint venture and by the wind tunnel staffs of the Danish Maritime Institute and the Boundary L ayer Wind Tunnel Laboratory, University of Western Ontario is also greatly appreciated.

A. Larsen/ Aerodynamic aspects of the final design

References

285

[1] M. Jensen and N. Franck, The Climate of Strong Winds in Denmark (Teknisk Forlag, Copenhagen, 1970). [2] P. Ostenfeld-Rosenthal, H.O. Madsen and A. Larsen, Probabilistic flutter criteria for long span bridges, 8th Int. Conf. on Wind Eng., London, Ontario, 1991. [3] Proposed British Design Rules, Bridge Aerodynamics, ICE Proc, Wyatt (Ed.) (Thomas Telford Ltd, London, 1981). [4] T. Miyata, K. Yokoyama, M. Yasuda and Y. Hikami, Akashi Kaikyo Bridge, wind effects and full model wind tunnel tests, Proc. Int. Symp. on Aerodynamics of Large Bridges, Larsen (Ed.) (Balkema, Rotterdam, 1992). [5] A. Selberg and E. Hjort-Hansen, The fate of flat plate aerodynamics in the world of bridge decks, The Theodorsen Colloquium, Oslo. [6] Aa. DamsgArd, A.G. Jensen, E. Hjort-Hansen and N.J. Gimsing, The use of section model tests in the design of the Store B~lt East Bridge in Denmark, Proc. Strait Crossings, Krokeborg (Ed.) (Balkema, Tronheim, 1990). [7] N.K. Poulsen, Aa. Damsg~rd and T. Reinhold, Determination of flutter derivatives for the Great Belt Bridge, 8th Int. Conf. on Wind Eng., London, Ontario, 1991. [8] A.G. Davenport, J.P.C. King and G.L. Larose, Taut strip model tests, Proc. Int. Symp. on Aerodynamics of Large Bridges, Larsen (Ed.) (Balkema, Rotterdam, 1992). [9] L. Wagner Smitt and M. Brinch, A new wide boundary layer wind tunnel at the Danish Maritime Institute, Proc. Int. Symp. on Aerodynamics of Large Bridges, Larsen (Ed.) (Balkema, Rotterdam, 1992). [10] C. Ostenfeld, G. Haas and A.G. Frandsen, Model tests for the superstructure of the motorway bridge across Lille B~lt, Bygningsstatiske Meddelelser, Vol. 41, no. 2, Kobenhavn, 1970. [11] F. Brancaleoni, The construction phase and its aerodynamic issues, Proc. Int. Symp. on Aerodynamics of Large Bridges, Larsen (Ed.) (Balkema, Rotterdam, 1992).