Recent Wind Tunnel Experiments

in Canada
on Inclined and Yawed Stay Cables
S.Chenga, J.B.Jakobsenb , G.L.Larosec, M.G.Savagec, H.Tanakad
a University

cNational Research Council Canada, Canada

of Windsor, Canada
b University of Stavanger, Norway dUniversity of Ottawa, Canada

2006 Wind Induced Vibration of Cable Stay Bridges Workshop, April 25-27

Outline
Project Background
What have been done and what have we learned
How the results affect stay cable design
What questions have been raised and the
follow on works
How other researchers responded to the issues
What is left to be done

Project Background
Observations in field and wind tunnel tests
A criterion concluded from a recent wind
tunnel study raised concerns
No sufficient available data for inclined
cable aerodynamics
Sc=48
Ur=108

D =160 mm
f =1.6 Hz
m=100 kg/m

U=10 m/s

=0.24%

Objectives
Confirm the existence of dry inclined
cable galloping
Clarify the excitation mechanisms
Assist in developing a more reliable
stay cable design guideline

What has been done

and
what have we learned

PHASE I
Dynamic model wind tunnel tests

Facility
Propulsion wind tunnel (NRCC/IAR)
Open circuit
Max. wind speed: 39 m/s
Working section

3m(W) 6m(H) 12m(L)

Cable model
Length: 6.7 m
Diameter: 160 mm
Unit mass: 60.8 kg/m

In-plane

Out-of-plane
Out-of-plane

In-plane

Testing Program
Model
Setup
1B
1C
2A
2C
3A
3B

Full-scale cable
angles (deg.)

Model cable angles

(deg.)

45
30
60
45
35
20

0
35.3
0
45
0
29.4

45
45
60
60
35
35

0
54.7
0
54.7
0
58.7

Aeroelastic responses
Divergent type (Setup 2C)

= 45o
= 45 o

= 60 o
= 54.7o
Dir. angle
Amplitude

90

0.6

72

0.45

54

0.3

36

0.15

18

0
0

20

10
40

15
20
25
Wind Speed (m/s)
60
80
100
120
Reduced Wind Speed

30

35
140

160

0
40

Angle of Motion Direction (Deg.)

Nondimensional Response Amplitude (A/D)

0.75

Onset wind velocity:

U= 32 m/s
Max. double amp.:
about 1D

Limited-amplitude vibration
0.6

40

0.45

30

0.3

20

0.15

10

20

10
40

15
20
25
Wind Speed (m/s)

30

60
80
100
120
Reduced Wind Speed

35
140

0
40

Dir. angle
Amplitude

0.2

40

0.15

30

0.1

20

0.05

10

0
0

20

160

10
40

Setup 2A
50

40

0.15

30

0.1

20

0.05

10

20

40

15
20
25
Wind Speed (m/s)

60
80
100
120
Reduced Wind Speed

Setup 1C

30

35

140

160

0
40

Nondimensional Response Amplitude (A/D)

0.2

10

30

60
80
100
120
Reduced Wind Speed

35
140

0
40

160

0.25

Angle of Motion Direction (Deg.)

Nondimensional Response Amplitude (A/D)

Dir. angle
Amplitude

15
20
25
Wind Speed (m/s)

Setup 1B

0.25

0
0

50

50
Dir. angle
Amplitude

0.2

40

0.15

30

0.1

20

0.05

10

0
0

20

10
40

15
20
25
Wind Speed (m/s)
60
80
100
120
Reduced Wind Speed

Setup 3A

30

35
140

160

0
40

Angle of Motion Direction (Deg.)

0
0

0.25

Angle of Motion Direction (Deg.)

50
Nondimensional Response Amplitude (A/D)

Dir. angle
Amplitude

Angle of Motion Direction (Deg.)

Nondimensional Response Amplitude (A/D)

0.75

Comparison with other studies

Current(Divergent)

Current(large amp.)

Current(medium amp.)

Current(small amp.)

Saito

Miyata

Honda

Saito's boundary

200
180
Unstable
Reduced wind velocity

160
140
120
100
80
60
Stable

40
20
0
0

10

20

30
Scruton number

40

50

60

PHASE II
Static model wind tunnel tests
Wind tunnel:
2m(H) 3m(W)
Closed-circuit
Umax : 140m/s

Model:
Circular cylinder
O.D. : 88.9mm
Length: 3.0m

Pressure tap arrangement

Static wind tunnel test

Testing program
Model orientation

Vertical angle: 90, 60, 54.7

Yaw angle: 0120

Wind speed: 15 99m/s

Same Reynolds number in the dynamic
and static tests
Sampling rate: 400Hz, 1200Hz

Static wind tunnel test

Critical condition of the divergent motion

Model Tests

Dynamic

Static

Model orientation
Ver. angle

Hor. Angle

Wind speed
(m/s)

60

54.7

32

(spring rotation
angle)

(Re=3.3105)

30

50-60

54.7

(Re=2.9-3.5105)

U=55m/s

s=54.7
s=30

Possible excitation mechanism

Iced cable galloping

CL/ + CD < 0

Dry inclined cable galloping

???

(CL/s)/A + CD < 0

Drag force coefficients (s=54.7)

0.8

0.8
Ring 2
Ring 4

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

U=50 m/s
Re =288925

0.2
0.1
20

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2

25
30
35
Mode l yaw a ngle (in degre es )

0.1
20

40

Dra g coe fficie nt C

Dra g coe fficie nt C

40

Ring 2
Ring 4

0.7

0.6
0.5
0.4

0.1
20

25
30
35
Mode l yaw a ngle (in degre es )

0.8
Ring 2
Ring 4

0.7

0.2

U=55 m/s
Re =317820

0.8

0.3

Ring 2
Ring 4

0.7

Dra g coe fficie nt C

Dra g coe fficie nt C

0.7

U=57 m/s
Re =329370

0.6
0.5
0.4

U=60 m/s
Re =346710

0.3
0.2

25
30
35
Mode l yaw a ngle (in degre es )
s

40

0.1
20

25
30
35
Mode l yaw a ngle (in degre es )
s

40

Lift force coefficients (s=54.7)

0.6

0.6
Ring 2
Ring 4

Ring 2
Ring 4

0.4

0.2

Lift coe fficie nt C

Lift coe fficie nt C

0.4

0
-0.2

U=50 m/s
Re =288925

-0.4

20

0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4

25
30
35
Mode l yaw a ngle (in degre es )

40

20

U=55 m/s
Re =317820

25
30
35
Mode l yaw a ngle (in degre es )
s

0.6

0.6
Ring 2
Ring 4

Ring 2
Ring 4

0.4

0.2

Lift coe fficie nt C

Lift coe fficie nt C

0.4

0
-0.2
-0.4

20

40

U=57 m/s
Re =329370

0.2
0
-0.2
U=60 m/s
Re =346710
-0.4

25
30
35
Mode l yaw a ngle (in degre es )
s

40

20

25
30
35
Mode l yaw a ngle (in degre es )
s

40

Significant decrease
of CD

Negative slope of
CL-s curve

A mechanism similar to
classical galloping

Application of Den Hartog criterion

6

6
Ring 2
Ring 4
4

dCL/d + CD

-4
-6
10

U=20 m/s

0
-2
U=30 m/s

Re =115570

20

-4

30
Ya w angle (Deg.)
s

40

50

Re = 173355

-6
10

20

30
Ya w angle (Deg.)
s

6
Ring 2
Ring 4
4

-2

dCL/d + CD

dCL/d + CD

Ring 2
Ring 4

2
0
-2

U=45 m/s
Re =260030

-4
-6
10

20

30
Ya w angle (Deg.)
s

40

50

40

50

Application of Den Hartog criterion (Contd)

6

6
Ring 2
Ring 4
4

dCL/d + CD

-2

-6
10

U=52 m/s
Re =300482

20

-2

U=57 m/s
Re =329370

-4

30
Ya w angle (Deg.)
s

40

-6
10

50

20

6
Ring 2
Ring 4
4

-4

dCL/d + CD

dCL/d + CD

Ring 2
Ring 4

2
0
-2
-4
-6
10

U=60 m/s
Re =346710

20

30
Ya w angle (Deg.)
s

40

50

30
Ya w angle (Deg.)
s

40

50

How the results

affect
stay cable design

Dynamic test results have been considered

in the Post Tensioning Institute Guideline
Appreciation from bridge engineers
Now wind tunnel tests on cables of long span
cable-stayed bridges is mandatory
Attracted interests from both academic and
industrial side internationally