1995
DOI: 10.1016/0167-6105(94)00092-r
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The buffeting wind loading of structural members at an arbitrary attitude in the flow

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The most popular model adopted for the structure is the unbounded rigid cylinder; however, the iced cable problem adds further difficulties, due to the curvature of its centerline and the random variation of the section. To tentatively tackle the problem, a simple model is adopted here, by introducing the following assumptions: (a) quasisteady theory [Blevins 1990] is believed applicable, according to which the loads acting on the moving body at a certain instant are identical to those exerted on the body at rest in the same position; (b) the curvature of the cable is negligibly small; (c) loads are evaluated in the current configuration Ꮿ, by accounting for the twist angle ϑ, but neglecting the smaller flexural rotations ϑ 2,3 = ᏻ (ϑδ) (remember Equations (2) and (13) 2 ), which, according to the so-called cosine rule [Strømmen and Hjorth-Hansen 1995], have small influence; (d) the ice is assumed to be uniformly distributed along the cable, consistently with the hypothesis of planar reference configuration; (e) aerodynamic couples are neglected.…”
Section: Aerodynamic Forcesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The most popular model adopted for the structure is the unbounded rigid cylinder; however, the iced cable problem adds further difficulties, due to the curvature of its centerline and the random variation of the section. To tentatively tackle the problem, a simple model is adopted here, by introducing the following assumptions: (a) quasisteady theory [Blevins 1990] is believed applicable, according to which the loads acting on the moving body at a certain instant are identical to those exerted on the body at rest in the same position; (b) the curvature of the cable is negligibly small; (c) loads are evaluated in the current configuration Ꮿ, by accounting for the twist angle ϑ, but neglecting the smaller flexural rotations ϑ 2,3 = ᏻ (ϑδ) (remember Equations (2) and (13) 2 ), which, according to the so-called cosine rule [Strømmen and Hjorth-Hansen 1995], have small influence; (d) the ice is assumed to be uniformly distributed along the cable, consistently with the hypothesis of planar reference configuration; (e) aerodynamic couples are neglected.…”
Section: Aerodynamic Forcesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(9)) then agrees with the equivalent terms in the formulation of Strømmen and Hjorth-Hansen (1995). 1 For the special case of a ¼ 0, e.g.…”
Section: Aerodynamic Damping Matrix Per Unit Length For Coupled 2domentioning
confidence: 56%
“…However, a complete theoretical model of the behaviour has been lacking, since galloping analysis normally treats the force coefficients as invariant with Reynolds number and considers only the component of flow velocity normal to the cable to be effective (Skarecky, 1975). Strømmen and Hjorth-Hansen (1995) have dealt with the three-dimensional geometry for buffeting of members at an arbitrary attitude to the flow. Their formulation includes the full quasi-steady aerodynamic damping matrix, but assumes that the force coefficients with respect to the normal component of the flow only vary with the ''vertical'' angle of attack.…”
Section: Article In Pressmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(11) is a generalised version of the aerodynamic damping matrix proposed by Piccardo (1993), allowing not only for arbitrary orientation of the principal axes but also for arbitrary location of the aerodynamic centre. The top left 2 Â 2 submatrix of C a is identical to the aerodynamic damping matrix for 2DOF translational galloping presented by Nikitas and Macdonald (2014) or a simplified version of the ones given by Strømmen and Hjorth-Hansen (1995), Macdonald and Larose (2008a) and Piccardo et al (2011), who all allowed for a skew angle in the third dimension. The other elements of C a are found to agree with the equivalent equations given by Gjelstrup and Georgakis (2011) (except for an apparent transcription error for their ∂Fy ∂ _ θ ), after substitution of certain angle variables and neglecting the terms allowing for the differentials with respect to Reynolds number and skew angle.…”
Section: Derivation Of the 3dof Aerodynamic Damping Matrixmentioning
confidence: 99%