MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385595821 · doi:10.1061/jsendh.steng-12147

Nonlinear Wind Tunnel Tests of Cable-Supported Bridges

2023· article· en· W4385595821 on OpenAlex
Sébastien Maheux, Jenny King, Ashraf El Damatty, Fabio Brancaleoni

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAeroelasticityStructural engineeringWind tunnelNonlinear systemBridge (graph theory)EngineeringSuspension (topology)Parametric statisticsSpan (engineering)GirderAerodynamicsAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the collapse of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge due to an aeroelastic instability, it has been common practice to test cable-supported bridges in a wind tunnel to check the soundness of bridge designs with respect to wind dynamic actions. Due to their simplicity, versatility and cost effectiveness, section model tests have become the standard approach for testing bridges. More advanced testing techniques, like full-aeroelastic model tests, are only utilized for validation purposes toward the end of the design process. Nevertheless, some generalizations with regard to the behavior of the bridge are necessary in section model tests in order to reach such simplicity. One of them is that they assume a linear structural behavior of the bridge structure. This might be inaccurate for very long cable-supported bridges as the structural behavior of such bridges is governed by their cable system, which is geometrically nonlinear. Considering that span lengths are getting longer, it is believed that it is needed to develop a better understanding of the influence of geometric nonlinearities on the wind response of bridges. Thus, this paper presents an experimental assessment of the effect of structural nonlinearities on the aeroelastic stability and wind response of cable-supported bridges. At first, the development of a new experimental apparatus for nonlinear section model tests of bridges is discussed. Then, the results of nonlinear section model tests conducted using the experimental apparatus are presented. Three different suspension bridge configurations are tested. The first one is for a single-box girder suspension bridge, and the second and third ones are for two twin-box girder suspension bridges having different span lengths. By comparing the results of linear tests to those of nonlinear tests, it is possible to assess the effect of structural nonlinearities. It is found that structural nonlinearities can have an effect on the critical velocity for flutter.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it