Nonlinear effects in sectional model aeroelastic parameters identification

Falco, M.; Curami, A.; Zasso, Alberto

doi:10.1016/0167-6105(92)90140-6

Cited by 45 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, if the body in question does not vibrate (f 0 = 0), the relative reduced frequency f r is zero: the coefficients measured statically in the wind tunnel on a physical model, placed in the (5.17) relations, make it possible to precisely calculate the aerodynamic forces acting on the actual body. As the value of f r increases, the aerodynamic force field comes to depend increasingly on the oscillations of the body: coefficients C r , C p and C m obtained experimentally, must be corrected as a function of the reduced frequency (correct quasi-static theory [21,22,[35][36][37]. Often, to define aerodynamic coefficients in relation to the quasi-static theory, corrected if necessary, we can also refer to another non-dimensional parameter, called reduced velocity V rid , defined as:…”

Section: Vibrating Systems With 1 Dof Perturbed Around the Position Omentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the following discussion we will assume, for simplicity's sake, that the quasi-static theory applies and we will assume that the values of the aerodynamic coefficients are known, while, for further details, we refer the reader to the Bibliography shown in the section "Aerodynamic forces acting on structures" [12,[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][35][36][37].…”

Section: Vibrating Systems With 1 Dof Perturbed Around the Position Omentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dynamical Systems Subjected to Force Fields

Cheli

Diana

2015

Advanced Dynamics of Mechanical Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to analyse the dynamics of a mechanical system we must address an issue which, in general, is very complex. In fact, there are systems that allow a position of static equilibrium and systems that, in general, do not allow such positions and are, on the contrary, designed to create a certain motion, such as machines in general. As regards systems that allow a position of static equilibrium, we have already examined the class corresponding to dissipative systems where the forms of energy addressed are elastic, gravitational and the dissipative function associated with nonconservative forms arising from hysteresis, friction or, in any case, from dissipation in the elastic elements themselves. In reality, these systems are subject to other force fields in addition to the elastic and gravitational ones: consider, for example, the case where a part, or the whole system, comes into contact with a fluid that exerts actions that depend on the relative motion between fluid and object, actions that are expressed, therefore, as force fields. In the case of a system with two elements that come into contact with each other, these are subject to actions that can again be expressed as a function of relative motion and, therefore, can be defined once more through a force field. An electromagnetic force acting on a part or an entire system can again be defined as a force field. The presence of force fields can alter the static and dynamic behaviour of the actual system in a more or less substantial manner. These cases are referred to as fluid-elastic or aeroelastic or magnetoelastic systems, depending on whether the force field results from a fluid in general, from the action of air or from an electromagnetic field. These force fields can be:Conservative force fields, similar to the elastic force field (conservative by definition), overlap the latter, altering, as we will see later, natural frequencies and

show abstract

Section: Vibrating Systems With 1 Dof Perturbed Around the Position Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Vibrating Systems With 1 Dof Perturbed Around the Position Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamical Systems Subjected to Force Fields

Cheli

Diana

2015

Advanced Dynamics of Mechanical Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cao and Sarkar, 2012;Chen et al, 2005;Diana et al, 2004Diana et al, , 2010Diana et al, , 2015Falco et al, 1992;Han et al, 2014;Lee and Kwon, 2009;Li, 1995;Matsumoto et al, 1993;Matsumoto, 1996;Neuhaus et al, 2009;Sarkar et al, 2009). Forced vibration tests considering vertical and pitching motions are now routinely conducted when designing bridges, occasionally allowing for coupling between the two motions (Cao and Sarkar, 2012;Diana et al, 2004;Falco et al, 1992;Han et al, 2014). Several experimental setups capable of forcing the section model in horizontal, vertical and pitching motions have been presented more recently (Diana et al, 2004;Han et al, 2014;Lee and Kwon, 2009;Neuhaus et al, 2009;Sarkar, et al, 2004).…”

Section: An Enhanced Forced Vibration Rigmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Significant progress has been made since Ukeguchi et al, (1966) presented the first experimental results for bridge decks in 1966, and an impressive amount of forced vibration rigs used in research can be found in the literature (e.g. Cao and Sarkar, 2012;Chen et al, 2005;Diana et al, 2004Diana et al, , 2010Diana et al, , 2015Falco et al, 1992;Han et al, 2014;Lee and Kwon, 2009;Li, 1995;Matsumoto et al, 1993;Matsumoto, 1996;Neuhaus et al, 2009;Sarkar et al, 2009). Forced vibration tests considering vertical and pitching motions are now routinely conducted when designing bridges, occasionally allowing for coupling between the two motions (Cao and Sarkar, 2012;Diana et al, 2004;Falco et al, 1992;Han et al, 2014).…”

Section: An Enhanced Forced Vibration Rigmentioning

confidence: 99%

An enhanced forced vibration rig for wind tunnel testing of bridge deck section models in arbitrary motion

Siedziako

Øiseth

Rönnquist

2017

Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a new experimental setup for the aerodynamic section model testing of bridge decks. The rig is designed to move a section model in arbitrary motion in a wind tunnel to imitate the motions of such scaled real bridge motion, step motion or random motion histories to be close to white noise. The proposed setup enables the forces acting on the section model to be measured directly while considering motions that resemble actual bridge motion and still fully utilizing the benefits of the forced vibration testing technique. The excellent performance of the system and testing procedure is proved by performing state-of-the-art forced vibration tests to extract 18 flutter derivatives of the Hardanger Bridge cross-section. The new experimental setup is further used to simulate a three-degree-of-freedom dynamic system driven by white noise to investigate whether the estimates of the aerodynamic derivatives are sensitive to the motion considered. The experimental results demonstrate that the estimates of the aerodynamic derivatives are not sensitive to the motion considered; these results indicate that the principle of superposition is fully applicable for the cross section as long as the motions are within the range considered.

show abstract

“…While it is possible to identify the forces from the difference of inertial and excitation forces on a structure forced to vibrate at a single frequency [9], or potentially from pressure taps on the section [10] it is usually experimentally simpler to obtain and analyse free vibration response records [11]. The free vibration may be in response to a transient deflection (step relaxation) or to buffeting caused by the airflow turbulence.…”

Section: Section Model Tests To Determine Aerodynamic Derivativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategies for aeroelastic parameter identification from bridge deck free vibration data

Jakobsen

2001

Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several techniques for identification of aerodynamic derivatives (ADs) from free vibration test data are compared using simulated data and test data obtained from wind tunnel tests. These identification methods include system identification from one degree of freedom or two degree of freedom response to either transient excitation or to turbulent buffeting. The experimental and analytical difficulties involved in each method are highlighted and suggestions made for the best approach to determination of ADs in both model and full-scale studies.Time domain methods using step relaxation provided the best results as long as air-flow turbulence does not cause severe signal to noise ratio problems with the free vibration decay. When, as in full-scale, the turbulence is the primary forcing function, time domain and frequency domain methods can be used to recover the full set of ADs concerning vertical and torsional response.

show abstract

Nonlinear effects in sectional model aeroelastic parameters identification

Cited by 45 publications

References 1 publication

Dynamical Systems Subjected to Force Fields

Dynamical Systems Subjected to Force Fields

An enhanced forced vibration rig for wind tunnel testing of bridge deck section models in arbitrary motion

Strategies for aeroelastic parameter identification from bridge deck free vibration data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About