Volume 2: Symposia, Parts A, B, and C 2003
DOI: 10.1115/fedsm2003-45514
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Computational Fluid Dynamics Model for Tacoma Narrows Bridge Upgrade Project

Abstract: The purpose of this work was to validate and apply a commercial computational fluid dynamics code with a hybrid RANS/LES turbulence computational model for a flow past a bluff body ultimately to help in the design of the caisson anchoring system during construction of a new adjacent span of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This one equation model is based on the Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) assumption that the flow can be decomposed in the sum of a steady flow and turbulent perturbations. More refined turbulence models such as Large Eddy Simulation (LES) or Detached Eddy Simulation (DES), based on transient hypothesis and grid filtering are available and have been experimented by the authors [8] but given the large number of simulations to be carried out and available computer resources, it has been decided to retain the RANS model. Initially, no transition models were used and on a bulb study, the absolute drag difference remains fairly small between the two methods.…”
Section: Cfd Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This one equation model is based on the Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) assumption that the flow can be decomposed in the sum of a steady flow and turbulent perturbations. More refined turbulence models such as Large Eddy Simulation (LES) or Detached Eddy Simulation (DES), based on transient hypothesis and grid filtering are available and have been experimented by the authors [8] but given the large number of simulations to be carried out and available computer resources, it has been decided to retain the RANS model. Initially, no transition models were used and on a bulb study, the absolute drag difference remains fairly small between the two methods.…”
Section: Cfd Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2D and panel methods have been used with some success [9,24] but with the spread of supercomputers, solving the full 3D Navier Stokes equations using turbulence models has become possible [13,17]. The limitations of actual methods are the free surface, the wave formation [7] and the use of sophisticated turbulence models such as Large Eddy Simulation [8,25].…”
Section: Computational Fluid Dynamics (Cfd) Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results for drag coefficients and Strouhal numbers were in excellent agreement for the square cylinder with a mean value close to 2.0 measured by Delany (1953). The details of these data may be found in Debus, et al (2003). Since the modeling of flow separation around square cylinders is more repeatable (and numerically more robust) than for circular cylinders, extrapolation to higher Reynolds numbers from the limited range of available data was done with greater confidence.…”
Section: Cfd Model Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The role of the incidence angle on square cylinders have been investigated, with focus on the vortex shedding, using air flow at low Reynolds numbers (e.g., see Dutta et al, 2008;Yoon et al, 2010). Numerical modeling have been used to study the fluid dynamics around bridge piers, this allowing the analysis of additional characteristics, such as local pressures on the pier walls (Wang et al, 2015;Nasim et al, 2018) or vortex shedding induced by complex geometries, like tandem piers (Almasri and Moqbel, 2017;Debus et al, 2003).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%