Wind loading and structural response Lecture 21 Dr. J.D.

Holmes

Towers, chimneys and masts

Towers, chimneys and masts

Slender structures (height/width is high) Mode shape in first mode - non linear

Higher resonant modes may be significant Cross-wind response significant for circular cross-sections critical velocity for vortex shedding $ 5n1b for circular sections 10 n1b for square sections - more frequently occurring wind speeds than for square sections

Towers, chimneys and masts

Drag coefficients for tower cross-sections

Cd = 2.2

Cd = 1.2

Cd = 2.0

Towers, chimneys and masts

Drag coefficients for tower cross-sections

Cd = 1.5

Cd = 1.4

Cd $ 0.6 (smooth, high Re)

Towers, chimneys and masts

Drag coefficients for lattice tower sections e.g. square cross section with flat-sided members (wind normal to face)
4.0

Drag coefficient CD (U=0O)

3.5

3.0

Australian Standards

ASCE 7-02 (Fig. 6.22) : CD= 4H2 5.9H + 4.0

2.5

2.0

1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Solidity Ratio H

H = solidity of one face = area of members z total enclosed area includes interference and shielding effects between members ( will be covered in Lecture 23 )

Towers, chimneys and masts

Along-wind response - gust response factor

Shear force : Qmax = DQ. Gq Bending moment : Mmax = DM. Gm Deflection : xmax = Dx. Gx The gust response factors for base b.m. and tip deflection differ because of non-linear mode shape The gust response factors for b.m. and shear depend on the height of the load effect, z1 i.e. Gq(z1) and Gm(z1) increase with z1

Towers, chimneys and masts

Along-wind response - effective static loads
160 140

Resonant
Background

Height (m)

120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0.0 0.2 0.4

Combined

Mean

0.6

0.8

1.0

Effective pressure (kPa)

Separate effective static load distributions for mean, background and resonant components (Lecture 13, Chapter 5)

Towers, chimneys and masts

Cross-wind response of slender towers For lattice towers - only excitation mechanism is lateral turbulence For solid cross-sections, excitation by vortex shedding is usually dominant (depends on wind speed) Two models : i) Sinusoidal excitation ii) Random excitation Sinusoidal excitation has generally been applied to steel chimneys where large amplitudes and lock-in can occur - useful for diagnostic check of peak amplitudes in codes and standards Random excitation has generally been applied to R.C. chimneys where amplitudes of vibration are lower. Accurate values are required for design purposes. Method needs experimental data at high Reynolds Numbers.

Towers, chimneys and masts

Cross-wind response of slender towers Sinusoidal excitation model : Assumptions : sinusoidal cross-wind force variation with time full correlation of forces over the height constant amplitude of fluctuating force coefficient Deterministic model - not random Sinusoidal excitation leads to sinusoidal response (deflection)

Towers, chimneys and masts

Cross-wind response of slender towers

Sinusoidal excitation model :

Equation of motion (jth mode):

   G j a  C j a  K j a ! Q j (t )
Gj is the generalized or effective mass = Jj(z) is mode shape Qj(t) is the generalized or effective force =

m(z)J j (z) dz

f(z, t)J j (z) dz

Towers, chimneys and masts

Sinusoidal excitation model Representing the applied force Qj(t) as a sinusoidal function of time, an expression for the peak deflection at the top of the structure can be derived : (see Section 11.5.1 in book)
y max (h) ! b
a

CN b

16 G j jSt

J (z) dz !
0 j 2

CN J j (z) dz
0

4 Sc St

J j (z) dz

where Lj is the critical damping ratio for the jth mode, equal to

Cj 2 GjK j

n jb nsb ! St ! U(z e ) U(z e )

Sc ! 4Tm
a j 2

Strouhal Number for vortex shedding ze = effective height (} 2h/3) (Scruton Number or mass-damping parameter) m = average mass/unit height

Towers, chimneys and masts

Sinusoidal excitation model This can be simplified to :
y max k.C N ! b 4T .Sc.St 2 ! J j (z) dz 0 h 2 0 J j (z) dz
h

where k is a parameter depending on mode shape

The mode shape Jj(z) can be taken as (z/h)F For uniform or near-uniform cantilevers, F can be taken as 1.5; then k = 1.6

Towers, chimneys and masts

Random excitation model (Vickery/Basu) (Section 11.5.2) Assumes excitation due to vortex shedding is a random process lock-in behaviour is reproduced by negative aerodynamic damping Peak response is inversely proportional to the square root of the damping In its simplest form, peak response can be written as :

y A ! b [( Sc / 4T )  K (1  y 2 ao

yL

)]1 / 2 2

A = a non dimensional parameter constant for a particular structure (forcing terms) Kao = a non dimensional parameter associated with aerodynamic damping yL= limiting amplitude of vibration

Towers, chimneys and masts

Random excitation model (Vickery/Basu) Three response regimes :
Maximum tip 0.10 deflection / diameter Lock-in Regime 0.01 Transition Regime Forced vibration Regime 20

0.001 2 5 10 Scruton Number

Lock in region - response driven by aerodynamic damping

Towers, chimneys and masts

Scruton Number The Scruton Number (or mass-damping parameter) appears in peak response calculated by both the sinusoidal and random excitation models

Sc !

4Tm b2 a m b2 a

Sometimes a mass-damping parameter is used = Sc /4T = Ka =

Clearly the lower the Sc, the higher the value of ymax / b (either model) Sc (or Ka) are often used to indicate the propensity to vortexinduced vibration

Towers, chimneys and masts

Scruton Number and steel stacks Sc (or Ka) is often used to indicate the propensity to vortex-induced vibration e.g. for a circular cylinder, Sc > 10 (or Ka > 0.8), usually indicates low amplitudes of vibration induced by vortex shedding for circular cylinders American National Standard on Steel Stacks (ASME STS-1-1992) provides criteria for checking for vortex-induced vibrations, based on Ka Mitigation methods are also discussed : helical strakes, shrouds, additional damping (mass dampers, fabric pads, hanging chains) A method based on the random excitation model is also provided in ASME STS-1-1992 (Appendix 5.C) for calculation of displacements for design purposes.

Towers, chimneys and masts

Helical strakes For mitigation of vortex-shedding induced vibration :
h/3 0.1b h

Eliminates cross-wind vibration, but increases drag coefficient and along-wind vibration

Towers, chimneys and masts

Case study : Macau Tower Concrete tower 248 metres (814 feet) high Tapered cylindrical section up to 200 m (656 feet) : 16 m diameter (0 m) to 12 m diameter (200 m)

Pod with restaurant and observation decks between 200 m and 238m Steel communications tower 248 to 338 metres (814 to 1109 feet)

Towers, chimneys and masts

Case study : Macau Tower aeroelastic model (1/150)

Towers, chimneys and masts

Case study : Macau Tower

Combination of wind tunnel and theoretical modelling of tower response used Effective static load distributions
distributions of mean, background and resonant wind loads derived (Lecture 13)

Wind-tunnel test results used to calibrate computer model

Towers, chimneys and masts

Case study : Macau Tower

Wind tunnel model scaling : Length ratio Lr = 1/150 Density ratio Vr = 1 Velocity ratio Vr = 1/3

Towers, chimneys and masts

Case study : Macau Tower

Derived ratios to design model : Bending stiffness ratio EIr = Vr Vr2 Lr4 Axial stiffness ratio EAr = Vr Vr2 Lr2 Use stepped aluminium alloy spine to model stiffness of main shaft and legs

Towers, chimneys and masts

Case study : Macau Tower

Mean velocity profile :

Full-scale Height (m)
350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0.0

Wind-tunnel AS1170.2 Macau Building Code

0.5

1.0

1.5

Vm /V240

Towers, chimneys and masts

Case study : Macau Tower

Turbulence intensity profile :

Wind-tunnel MACAU TOWER - Turbulence AS1170.2 Macau Profile Intensity Building Code 350 300

Full-scale Height (m)

250 200 150 100 50 0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3

Iu

Towers, chimneys and masts Case study : Macau Tower

Wind tunnel test results - along-wind b.m. (MN.m) at 85.5 m (280 ft.)
R.m.s. MACAU TOWER Mean Maximum 0.5% damping Minimum 2000 1500 1000 500 0 -500 0

20

40

60

80

100

Full scale mean wind speed at 250m (m/s)

Towers, chimneys and masts Case study : Macau Tower

Wind tunnel test results - cross-wind b.m.(MN.m) at 85.5 m (280 ft.)

TOWER Mean 0.5% damping Minimum Maximum

R.m.s. MACAU 2000 1500 1000 500 0 -500 0 -1000 -1500 -2000

20

40

60

80

100

Full scale mean wind speed at 250m (m/s)

Towers, chimneys and masts Case study : Macau Tower

Along-wind response was dominant Cross-wind vortex shedding excitation not strong because of complex pod geometry near the top Along- and cross-wind have similar fluctuating components about equal, but total along-wind response includes mean component

Towers, chimneys and masts Case study : Macau Tower Along wind response :
At each level on the structure define equivalent wind loads for : mean wind pressure background (quasi-static) fluctuating wind pressure resonant (inertial) loads These components all have different distributions Combine three components of load distributions for bending moments at various levels on tower Computer model calibrated against wind-tunnel results

Towers, chimneys and masts Case study : Macau Tower

Design graphs

cracked concrete 5% damping

Mean Along-wind bending moment at 200 metres (MN.m) 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Full scale mean wind speed at 250m (m/s) Maximum

Towers, chimneys and masts Case study : Macau Tower

Design graphs
Macau Tower Effective static loads (s=0 m)
U m ean = 59 7m/s; 5% damping

350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 100 Load (kN/m) 200

Mean Background Resonant Combined

Height (m)

End of Lecture 21
John Holmes
225-405-3789 JHolmes@lsu.edu