Paper No.

6610

THE RESPONSE OF SLENDER, LINE-LIKE STRUCTURES

TO A GUSTY WIND
bY
Man Garnett Davenport, B.A., M.A., M.A.Sc., Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Engineering Science,
University of Western Ontario
For written discussion

SYNOPSIS
A number of civil engineering structures suchas 10%-span suspension bridges,
tall masts and overhead power lines conform to a slender, line-like form. The
general expressions for the response of such structures to a gusty wind are
developed using the concepts of the stationary random series. Some empirical
data on atmospheric turbulence suitable for estimating the gust loading are
provided. In a worked example the response of a long-span overhead power
line is considered.

INTRODUCTION
INa previous paper’ the Author discussed the effects of a gusty wind on a
simple elasticstructure having one degreeof freedom and small enoughfor the
wind forces to be acting virtually at a point. In the present Paper the solution
is extended to certain flexible structures of slender, elongated, linelike form.
There are a number of civil engineering structures of this type: among them are
long-span bridges-in particular suspension bridges-tall masts and stacks and
overhead power lines. All of them are particularly vulnerableto wind loading.
2. There are two principal differences between the response of “line” and
“point” structures to a natural wind and both relate to the effects of gusts.
First, a point structure is likely to have only one mode of vibration, whereas a
line structure may have many modes, each of which may be excited by the wind.
Second, a point structure is only affected by the temporal velocity fluctuations
of the wind at a point, while for a line structure the spatial variations of the
wind velocity acrossthe span are also important.
3. Although the dynamiceffectsof the gustinesshave not hithertobeen
fully appreciated (possibly becausethe standard practices in use today grew up
in an era of monumental structures such as the Forth Bridge and the Eiffel
Tower whose rigidity practically precluded any possibility of dynamic excitation),
some attempts have been made to allow for the fact that gusts are relatively
localized. In his notable experiments at the Forth Bridge,forinstance, Sir
Benjamin Baker2 (1884) found that thepressures on awind-gaugeboard

1 The references are given on pp. 407-8.

389
390 DAVENPORT ON RESPONSE OF SLENDER, LINE-LIKE

300 sq. ft in area were some 50% less than those on a board 13 sq. ft in area.
More recently Sherlock’ (1 947) found by studying the force on a 120-ft conductor
wire that the effective velocityat any one moment, averaged over the wholeof
this length was 3.1% less at 37 m.p.h. and 8.2% less at 45 m.p.h. than the
velocity at a point. The pressures were correspondingly some 6% and 16%
less. Bearing in mind that Baker’s results refer to areas and Sherlock’s to a
line, the results are in reasonable agreement. However, in spite of these fairly
positive indications, full advantage has never been taken of the possible reduc-
tions. This maybe partly due to a contrary (but somewhat dubious) conclusion
reached by Stanton following his notable experiments at the Tower Bridge (see
the Author’s discussion4-Davenport, 1960) but more particularly due to the
lack of a suitable statistical framework into which to fit these observations.
4. More recently this situation has improved. Liepmanns (1952) has pointed
out that the statistical concepts of the stationary time series and the power
spectrum approach, inconjunctionwith statistical theories of turbulence
developed earlier by G . I. Taylor (1935) could be usefully applied to the gust
loading of aircraft. The same techniques are used in this and the previous
paper to solve the gust-loading problem of civil engineering structures.
5. In solving the overall wind loading problem (effects of the mean wind as
well as gusts) it was previously found practicable to relate the gust loading to
the concurrent mean wind load averaged over an hour or so. The statistical
properties of the loading could then be determined from the climatological
records of mean (hourly) wind velocity kept by meteorological stations. The
same approach is applicable here.

RESPONSE OF A LINE-LIKE STRUCTURE TO STATIC AND STOCHASTIC LOADS

6. It is convenient to consider the general behaviour of a slender flexible
structure (such as a beam or string) to two particular types of loading, the first
loading static, and the second a stochastic loading of the stationary random
type. The first is relevant to the problem of mean wind loading and the second
to the superimposed gust loading.
Response to static loading
7. There are a number of methods for determining the response of a beam
or string to static loads. It is,however, pertinent here to developonly one
which later has its counterpart in determining the response to gust loading.
It depends on the serial representation of the load and response (i.e. deflexion)
in terms of the natural modes of the structure.
8. In general, the natural modes of the structure will be given by the various
solutions to the equation
K ( x ) . y + m ( x ) *d2Y
dt*
- =0 , .. . . .
where m(x) and K ( x ) are general expressionsfor the mass and equivalent stiff-
ness of the structure and y is the deflexion at station X on the span. The infinite
number of solutions to this equation can generally be written
yr(x, t ) = &).sin 2mn,t . . . . . . (2)
where n, is the natural frequency in the rth mode and pI(x)is the rth mode, i.e.
the function defining the shape of the deflexion curve.
STRUCTURES TO A GUSTY WIND 39 l
9. Any static load distribution P(x) acting on the structure can be expressed
in terms of these modes as follows
P(x) = 2P,.p,(x) . . . . . . . ( 3 )
1

10. The coefficients P, can be found by multiplying both sides by p,(x) and
integrating overthe entire span (much as in Fourier analysis). Since a universal
property of natural modes is that they are orthogonal to one another

Thus

The stiffnesscan be similarly representedas

m ) = 2Kr.pr(x)
r
. . . . . . (6)

where
K - L/'K(x).p,(x)dx
=-NI 0
. . . . .
The deflexion of the structure may then be written

11. Knowing the deflexion and load distribution it is then a straightforward

matter to determine other quantities such as the moments and stresses.

The response to random loads

12. The object of this analysis is to determine the statistical properties of
the response of the structure (i.e., the deflexion, moments, stresses, etc.) in terms
of the statistical properties of the imposed load, It will be assumed for the
present that thesestatisticalpropertiescanbefully specified if the mean,
the varianceand the spectrum of each of these quantities are known. Since the
determination of the mean response hasbeen dealt with in the previous section
it remains only to determine the variance (i.e., mean square response) and the
spectrum (i.e., mean square response per unit frequency intervalfor the range of
frequencies).
13. This general problem has infact been discussed fully by Eringen6(1953).
However, the solution he has developedcan be considerably simplified if certain
coupling effects between different modes ofthe beam are omitted. The response
of the structure in each mode can then be separately analysed (in the manner
of the simple one-degree-of-freedom structures discussedpreviously by
Davenport' in 1961) and the results superimposed. This approach is generally
justifiable in systems in which the damping is smalland the natural frequencies
are well separated.
14. As a first step in this procedure the load across the span at time t, P(t, X )
is broken downinto a series expansion involving the natural modes, that is,
P(r, X ) = 2Pr(t).pr(x) . . . . . . (9)
Here P&) can be thought of as the force at time t causing excitation of the
392 DAVENPORT ON RESPONSE OF SLENDER, W - L I K E
beam in the rth mode; pr(x) is the function definii the deflexion of the beam
in the rth mode for unit deflexion at the reference point. To determine the
coefficients, a procedure similar to that used in the static case (see eq. 5 ) be
used, viz.
P&) = /,
1 ‘
P(t, X) .p,(x)dx . . . .*

15. The mean square of this load component is then

1 I [
[Pr(t)]2= G / o / o P ( t , x).P(t,x’).pr(x).prx’.dx.dd . (11)
where the bars denote time averages. Now the quantity on the left hand side
represents the variance of the quantity Pr(t) and the quantity P(t, x).P(t, X’)
represents the covariance of the load P(t, X) at points X and X‘ on the span.
Since it is assumed that the force P(t, X) is a stationary random function of time
the above equation (11) can be rewritten in terms of the spectra of P&) and
P(t, X). That is

where Sp,(n) is the spectrum of the rth mode load component and S& X ’ ; n)
the cross-spectrum of the loads on the span at X and X’, for frequency n. The
cross-spectrum is a complex quantity, that is to say it is defined by two com-
ponents, one in phase and the other in quadrature. It can be normalized by
dividing by the spectrum at some reference point yielding, effectively, a cross-
correlation coefficient between the loads at the two points X and X‘ for the
frequency n.
16. Hence

where Spo(n) =the spectrum of the force at a referencepoint and R(x, x’n) = the
cross-correlation coefficient of the load at X and X’ at frequency n,

17. The above expression can be simplified by writing

SP,(~) I J h ) I * SpO(n) . . . (14)
where

18. The latter is sometimes termed thejoint acceptance for the rth mode and
measures the correlation between the spatial distribution of pressure across the
span and the mode.
19. The response to the rth mode load component Pr(t) can be expressed
generally by the equation
STRUCTURES TO A GUSTY WIND 393
in which m,,c, and K,are generalized expressionsfor the mass, velocity damping
and stiffness inthe rth mode of vibration and y, is the deflexionof the reference
point.
20. The spectrum of the deflexion in the rth mode can now be determined
by the same method used previously in determining the response of the one-
degreeof-freedom structure (Davenport', 1961), yielding
. . . . (17)

in which

n, = natural frequency in the rth mode

and S, =logarithmic damping decrement inthe rth mode.

21. If it is assumed that the coupling effects between modes are negligible
the total spectrum of the deflexion at a particular point X on the span can now
be found by superimposing the deflexion spectra for all the individual modes.
22. Thus syk n) = 2sy,(n) * (18)
By the definitionof a spectrumthe variance of the deflexion at X is thus given by

where ur2(Pdyn) =the variance of the dynamically magnified mode component

of load for the rth mode

= S ~ l X r ( n ) l 2 . l ~ , ( n ) l 2 . s p ~ ( n ) . d n. . . . . . . (20)

23. In the case of a beam, thespectra of the shear force and bending moment
at a point X are given by

sq(x, n) = 2 r
Ixr(n)l2.sP,(n).4r2(x) . . . (21)

where m&) and qr(x) are the bending momentand shear force at station due to
unit rth mode load component.
24. The variances of shear force and bending moment at X may be written

us2(x) = 2 u,z(P dyn)qr2(x) . . . . . (23)

394 DAVENPORT ON RESPONSE OF SLENDER, LINE-LIKE

and um2(x)= 2r
a,TP dyn).mr2(x) . . . . . (24)

25. It is evident that the data required for evaluating the above expressions
are :
(1) the spectrum of the load
(2) the cross spectrum of the load for pairs of points across the span
(3) the modes and natural frequencies of the structure, and
(4) the damping.

AERODYNAMIC FORCES DUE TO THE WIND

Mean wind
26. It is well known that the steady force P on a structure in a steady flow of
v,
velocity is given by the equation
P = +p. CF. 8 2 . . . . . . . (25)
in which p = air density
and C, = a coefficient of force per unit length
27. In a line structure the important forces are those in the plane perpen-
dicular to it, and consist of the drag, lift and overturning moment (the last
arising when the centre of pressure and the centre of twist do not coincide).
These forcescan easily be measured in a wind tunnel.
28. The direction of the mean wind velocity can almost always be assumed
horizontal: only in steep mountainous areas is it likely to be significantlyother-
wise. Although in other areas very slightdeviations maybepresentdue to
the topography it would take very abrupt changes in groundcontours to produce
changes in the vertical inclination even comparable with the changes brought
about by the vertical components of turbulence.
29. In a vertical structure it is necessary to allow for the variation in mean
wind velocity with height above ground: this point has been discussed previously1.
Loads due to gusts
30. In most linestructures it seems reasonable to assume
(1) that the most serious effects are likely to be felt in a beam wind, and
(2) that small changes of wind direction in the direction of the axis of the
structure have little or no effect on the loading.
31. No comment seemsnecessary on the first of theseassumptions. The
second impliesthat a vertical structure (such as a tall mast) is not affected by the
vertical component of turbulence and therefore responds onlyto the horizontal
components of turbulence, and that a horizontal structure (such as a suspension
bridge or overhead power line)in a beam wind is unaffected by the cross-wind
component of turbulence and responds only to the fluctuations in speed and
the vertical component.
32. Two further assumptions are necessary in determining the properties
of the gust loads:
(3) that the structures (or structural members) are sufficiently slender for
the secondary span-wise flow and redistribution of pressures to be
neglected, such that the pressures on any section of the span are only
due to the wind incident on that section; and
 STRUCTURES TO A GUSTY WIND 395
(4) that the turbulent fluctuations are so smallcompared to the mean
velocity that the gust loads can be expressed as linear functions of
the gust velocities.
33. The former of these is referred to in aeronautical parlance as the “strip
assumption” and is commonly used in determining the aeroelastic behaviour
of aircraft wings. It would certainly seem reasonable here when the structure
is either a thin cable or an open lattice truss as is typical of most modern sus-
pension bridges and masts. It is not likely to be valid for structures having a
larger aspect ratio such as buildings (even tall skyscrapers).
34. The last assumption enablesus to write expressionsfor the instantaneous
drag P ( t ) ; lift L(t);and overturning torque M(t) induced on a strip (or “salmon
slice”) of the structure by sinusoidal fluctuations inthe horizontal and vertical
velocity of v sin 2 m t and W sin 2 m t respectively (where n is the frequency) as
follows

~ ( t=) P+ U .
V
+l(n). ?.sin GTnt+e,) . . . . (26)

L(t) = L+2L.+z(n).=-.sin(2rrnt+82)+~.$3(n).---.sin(2?mt+83)
V dL W (27)
V
V dM W
~ ( t=) f i + 2 ~ T . + ~ ( n ) - -s i n ( 2 ~ n r + e ~ ) + - - + ~ ( n ) . - =sin (2wnt+B5) (28)
8 dol V
where 01.....05 arephaseangles;
$1 . . .
are aerodynamic admittances;
4 and are variations of lift and torque withangle of attack;
and E and m a r e the lift and torque due to the mean wind. (These expressions
are written for a horizontal line structure: for a vertical linestructure of w must
be interpreted as a cross wind velocity).
35. In terms of the spectra of the vertical and horizontal velocity components
S&) and Sw(n) and cross correlation spectrum S&) the spectra of the drag,
lift and overturning torque S&), S&) and S&) are
S&)
Sp(n) = 4F2l$~(n)l2-
82
. . . . . . . . . . (29)

36. Theseexpressionswilloftensimplifyeitherbecause the lift and/or

torque due to the mean wind are negligible or because the cross-correlation
spectrum is negligible compared to the other terms.
396 DAVENPORT ON RESPONSE OF SLENDER, LIN’E-LIKE

37. Somecommentisnecessaryregardingtheaerodynamicadmittances
.
+ l . . .d5. These quantities must allow for two effects: the first relates to the
possibility that the resistance in fluctuating flow is not quasi-static and varies
with frequency (asin fact it has been found to do). Secondly, it must allow
for the spatial variation of the flow in the sense that the forces are generated
not by the velocity fluctuationsat a point in the flow but over somefinite region
surrounding the cross section of the structure.
38. Both these effects are only likely to be important in structures having
wider cross sections. In a thin cable structure the natural frequencies of the
structure are such that the important gust wave lengths are of the order of 1,OOO
times the cable diameter. Under these circumstances the resistance is almost
certain to be quasi-static and the aerodynamic admittme therefore effectively
unity. In a suspensionbridge or tall mast,however, the diameterismuch
larger (compared with the important gust wave lengths) and the matter may
require consideration.
39. In viewof the “strip assumption”referred to above, the span-wise
cross-correlation of pressures is the same as the span-wise cross-correlation of
velocities. Thus it is apparent that estimates can be made of the spectra of the
loads, provided that expressions can be found for :
(1) the spectrum of horizontal velocity;
(2) the spectrum of vertical velocity;
(3) the cross-correlation spectra of both vertical and horizontal velocities
for cross wind separations (relevant to horizontal structures); and
(4) the cross-correlation spectraof horizontal velocities for vertical separa-
tions (relevant to vertical structures).
Some estimatesof these quantities are now provided.

PROPERTIES OF ATMOSPHERICTURBULENCE

Spectrum of horizontal gustiness

40. An empirical expression for the spectrum of horizontal gustiness in the
frequency range of in high winds has been suggested by Davenport’ (1961 b),
and is shown in Fig. 1 in the non-dimensional form
n .SAn) X2

PI2 - 4K -+
(1 x2)4/3
. . . .
where X = 4,000 n/ V, (with n/rlin cycles/ft)
K = surface drag coefficient
= velocity at reference height of 33 ft, (10 m)
This expression was utilized in the previous Paperl.

Vertical velocity spectrum

41. A general expression for the spectrum of the vertical velocity component
at height above ground suggested by Panofsky and McCormickg (1959), is
STRUCTURES TO A GUSTY WIND 397
where f = n z / p = the ratio of height to wavelength
= a reference velocityat height z1
zo = the roughnesslength
42. From the Prandtl velocity profile, taking von Karman's constant (0.40)

INVERSE WAVELENGTH 7- CYCLES/FOOT

4 -
NOTE: S, (m) z Spectrum of hclght z and frequencyn

= Mean velocity at reference helght 4 - 10 m (33 e)

K = Surface dragcoefflcient(referred CO
-5 )
FIG. 1.~PECI'RUMOF HORIZONTAL GUSTINESS

where K is the drag coefficient at the surface referred to the mean velocityat the
10 m height, 71 as in the horizontal spectrum.
Rewriting

This function is shown in Fig. 2. The form differs somewhat from the hori-
zontal spectrum insofar as the vertical scale of the disturbances appears to be
governed by the height above ground.

Cross-correlation coeficients
43. The cross-correlation coefficients whichexpress the phase relationship
and randomness between different velocity componentsat the same or different
398 DAVENPORT ON RESPONSE OF SLENDER, LINE-LIKE
STRUCWRES TO A GUSTY WIND 399
points in the flow, are normally complexquantities: that is to say they contain
two components, one measuring the in-phase correlation and the other the
quadrature. However, because the maximum force on a horizontal line struc-
ture is almost certain to be felt in a beam wind, it follows that only the span-
wise cross-correlation is of importance,i.e. in the cross-winddirection. By
symmetry the quadrature component is zero in this case. For a verticalstructure
this is not so, as is discussed later.
44. Over the region of high correlation, the cross-wind cross-correlation, it
seems, can be quite adequately represented by a simple exponential expression
of the type
R,,‘($ = e-lx-x‘l/L . . . . . . . (34)

(7
where L ;is termed the ‘‘scale” of the turbulence and is a function of the
wavelength
45. Putting the separation X - x ’ = A x it is seen that

/;~,,(n)d(Ax) = L . . . . . . (35)
The scalecan therefore be thought of or the average dimensionof a disturbance
of given wavelength.
46. Some resultsquoted by Cramerg (1958) for the “scales” of the horizontal
F
components of turbulence are shown in Fig. 3 as functions of 7 the wavelength.
The results were obtained in open grassland. Only cross-wind scales for stable
stratification are shown:forunstableconditions the cross-windscales are

,
’ l
- -
U component
0 ’/ Along
wind:
(also cmsmlnd In
unstable
conditlonr)

- - -. - V component

-
WAVELENGTH 5: FEET
FIG. 3.-sCALES OF TURBULENCE FOR HORIZONTALCOMPONENTS OF WIND VELOCITY AS A
. FUNCTION OF WAVELENGTH
(AFTER CRAMER)
400 DAVENPORT ON RESPONSE OF SLENDER, LINE-LIKF.

stated to be more or less the same magnitude as the down-wind. From the
Figure it would appear
__ that the cross wind “scales” can be represented quite
adequately by
P in
stable
conditions
and
1P
L(:) = 7n inunstableconditions
47. The question which of these is the more appropriate in high winds needs
to be considered. Although there is not yet much information available the
indications are that inhighwinds the turbulence structure tendsmore to
resemble that in fairly stable conditions insofar as the disturbances tend on the
whole to be elongated in the direction of the wind. Cross-correlation results
calculated by the writer from Bailey and Vincent’s10 (1939) SevernBridge
records ofwindvelocity at various points across the span, suggest that the
lateral scale (of the longitudinal velocity component) is about onethird of its
longitudinal scale.
48. However, in the present state of knowledge it seems advisable to adopt
the more conservative estimate (i.e., the value producingthe higher correlation)
and assumethevalue for the cross-windscale in unstableconditions. The
cross-correlation coefficient is then
RA,(n) = e-7Ax.nlF . . .
. . . . (36)
The same expression is assumed for the lateral correlationof the vertical velocity
component.
49. Some estimates of the cross correlation of the horizontal velocities in
the verticaldirectionhavebeenmade bySinger1’frommeasurements
on a 400-ft mast situated in wooded country and by Davenport7 on a 500-ft
mast in open grassland. From these it was apparent that the quadrature
correlation, although small, was not zero. In fact themaximumcorrelation
between the velocity, at two pointsseparated
vertically,
occurred not
simultaneously but after the wind had travelled downwind a distance roughly
equal to the vertical separation. There was no suggestion that the vertical scale
of the horizontal fluctuations varied with height above ground.
50. In spite of the non-zero quadrature component it is nevertheless small,
and it seems adequate for practical purposes to use the square root of the
“coherence”as ameasureof the cross-comllation. Thecoherenceis the
absolute square of the in-phase and quadrature correlations.Measurements
of the coherence during occasions of strong windmade bySinger and
Davenportare shown in Figs 4aand 4b.Markeddifferences in surface
roughness do not seem to have any appreciable effect.
51. It is evident that the same expression usedfor the other cross-correlation
coefficients is also adequate for the vertical cross-correlation: that is
R&) W dCoherence
-
. . . . .(37)
e-ln.Az/V
 401

0 150-300het
(average runs
023. 926.927)

1-0-

00 1
08 06 00 04 02 I.o I.2

4z.n
RATIO OF VERTICALSEPARATION TO WAVELENGTH Y
VI0

09

07

E@ "=- \
04 -

0 3.-

02-

01-
U
0 A A
0.01 I I
06 0.00 4 02 0.8 I .o I2 'l'4
RATIO OF VERTICAL SEPARATION TO WAVELENGTH
VI0
FIG.4 . a H E R E N C E OF WINDSPEED IN STRONG WIND AS A FUNCTION OF VERTICAL
SEPARATION TO WAVELENGTH RATIO -
(A;)
(top) for wooded countryside(after Singer) (bottom) for open grassland
30
402 DAVENPORT ON RESPONSE OF SLENDER, LINE-LJKE

mechanical damping at the joints and in the material of a structure, and from
the aerodynamic damping due to the motion of the object through the strong
current of air. Some estimation of these damping parameters is vital on account
of the control they exert over the amplitudes of oscillation. It is not possible
to determine the mechanical damping in general terms since it depends entirely
on the type, material and construction of the structure: it is possible, however,
to derive some general expressionsfor the aerodynamic damping as shown below.

Aerodynamic damping
53. A structure vibrating in air will be subject to certain aerodynamic forces
tending to damp the vibration. In still air, the forces will result mainly from
the viscosity of the air. The damping is not likely to be large, and probably
insignificantcompared to the mechanicaldamping. In a strong wind, the
principal aerodynamic forces acting will be form drag and lift. If the object is
moving, fluctuating components of these lift and drag forces will be induced,
tending to oppose, and hence, damp out the motion.
54. An approximate expression for the logarithmic damping decrement is

where AE is the work done per cycle against the drag (or lift) and E is the total
energy stored in the system.
55. Suppose the mode of the beam (i.e. mast or suspension bridge) is pI(x),
then the velocity of the beam at station X is p= 2mz,p1(x)sin 2rn,t where n, is
the natural frequency in the rth mode.
56. The drag on aslice of the beam of length dx, inasteadywind of
velocity Tx,is
Fx.dx = 3 p . C ~Fx2.D.dX
.
where D is the diameter of the beam.
The fluctuating component of this drag, when the velocity of the object is j , is
2y -
-P . d x
P
The work done per cycle on the slice is then
2y -
d(AE) = dxlp=P,.dy
V
X

where the integral is taken over one cycle.

The total energy in the system is given by the kinetic energyat the mid-position
of the oscillation. For the same slice of the beam this is
d ( E ) = dx.+.m(x).p2
where m(x) is the mass per unit length at station X .
For the entire beam, the logarithmic decrementis therefore
STRUCTURES To A OUSTY WIND 403
T h i s is the basic expression for the logarithmic decrement due to aerodynamic
drag damping.
57. In the above form the expression applies principally to the tall mast, in
which allowancehas to be madefor variations, in the wind velocity with height,
and in the section of the mast. In horizontal structures (such as the suspension
bridge and overhead power line) both of these generalitiesare unnecessary and
both the wind velocity and the section canbe assumed constant across the span.
The expression then becomes simply
S=- P . . . .
. . . . (40)
n,. 7 . m
Here the numerator represents the drag per unit length in a steady wind of
velocity p (provided that the drag coefficient can be taken as for quasi-steady
flow).
58. For the vertical vibrations the expression is found to be

dL
where - is the rate of change of the lift force perunit length of the deck with
da
the angle of attack a (in radians).
59. Evidently, the damping varies directly as the meanwindvelocity and
inversely as the frequency of vibration. The latter implies that the higher modes
are more lightly damped.

APPLICATIONS
Gust factors
60. The product of the analysis so far has been to enable estimates to be
made of certain statistical properties ofthe deflexions, bending moments, shear
forces, etc., at points across the span of a line-like structure in a strong wind.
It remains to beshownhowtheseresults can beuseful in determining the
specific quantities required in the design. Probably the most useful statements
that can be made concernthe maximum deflexions and stress levels at points in
the structure having a given probabilityof occurrence (e.g. the oncein-100-year
peak stress). At a later stage, when the evaluation of fatigue life can be under-
taken, it may be valuable to be able to estimate the number of applications of
stress ofgiven magnitude. These and other questions can be answered using
certain time-history relationships some ofwhichweregiven in the previous
Paper'.
61. Many of these rely on the assumption that the statistical distribution of
the variable is normal or Gaussian. Justification for assuming that the wind
turbulence was Gaussian was given in the previous Paper': from the further
assumptions that the variables(velocity,pressure,deflexion,etc.) are linear
functions of one another it follows that they, too, are Gaussian.
62. For such a distribution it was shown that the largest instantaneous value
of a stationary random variable X during a period T averages
Xpcak = . 3 . (42)
404 DAVENPORT ON RESPONSE OF SLENDER, LINE-LIKE

where

and R, u(x) and &(n) are respectively the mean, standard deviation and spectrum
of X. Values of g(vT) as a function of vT are shown in Fig. 5.
63. It was also shown previously that if the period T was chosen large com-
1
pared to the characteristic response time ;then the largest instantaneous peak
value would not vary much from one period to the next. Thus not much error
would be incurred if the largest value is taken equal to the average given in
eq. (42).
64. In the case of the wind, the mean value P is also a chance event with a
frequency distribution of its own. Because of the narrowness of the peak value
distributions it follows that the overall distribution of peak values (taking into
account the mean value variation) will besimilar to the mean value distribution
but with the variable augmentedby the factor
(1 +g(vT) F).
The latter is termed the “gust factor” since it indicates the additional stress,
deflexion etc. attributable to the gustiness.
65. It should be pointed out that the gust factor is not necessarily constant

RSWNSE FACTOR V T
FIG. 5.-&AK GUST FACTOR AS A FUNCI‘ION OF RESPONSEFACTOR
STRUCTURES To A GUSTY WIND 405
and may vary with changes in mean wind velocity. This variation is not likely
to be large however,and the adoption of some value corresponding
to the design
mean wind velocity shouldbe satisfactory.

Simplifcations
66. Thenumericalevaluationof the expressionsdeveloped in previous
sections is made considerably easier by one or two simplications which are
possible under most circumstances. The frst of these relates to the calculation
of the “joint acceptances” of the various modes. When the derived expressions
for the cross-correlation coefficient of pressures and the modes are substituted
into the expression for the joint acceptance (eq.15) it is found that the latter
can be expressed in termsof integrals of the type

n
where ~ ~ 7 7 1It .is found that over the important range of the spectra (at or
near the resonant frequency), c is generally greater that about 5 for most long
span suspensionbridges,cablesandmasts.Consequently,theregion of sig-
nificant correlation is confined to fairly short sections of thespan. For the
larger values of c the average correlation over these intervals tends towards 2/c.
Furthermore, since these sections are short X and X’ will not be widely separated
over regions of significant correlation and the above integral tends towards

67. Thus the joint acceptance at the natural frequency will have a value given
approximately by

(45)

68. A second simplifmtion relates to the integral of a spectrum to deter-

mine the variance. When the damping of the system is small it is normal for
the spectrum of the dynamic response to be characterized by a predominant peak
situated at the natural frequency which in fact contains the bulk of the energy
in the whole spectrum. In these cases the variance (equal to the area under
the spectrum) is given closelyby
T2
26,n,.S,(n,) . . . . . . (46)

where 6, is the logarithmic decrementin the rth mode.

69. As a consequence of this the response factor in equation (62) is approxi-
mated by
v M n, . . . . . . . . (47)
Example
70, As a worked examplewe consider the wind loadingon a suspended cable
406 DAVENPORT ON RESPONSE OF SLENDER, LINE-LIKE

span having the dimensionsgivenbelow. The design mean windvelocityis

taken as 100 ft./sec. (68 m.p.h.) and the drag coefficient of the terrain,
K = 0.01
span: 4,000 ft
Dip: 270 ft
Height above ground: 200 ft
Drag force per unit cable wt.= 3-3 X 10-5. V2
where V = velocity in ftlsec.
7 1. The natural modes and periods of the cable are found to be as follows*
Horizontal Period Mode
(secs)
X
1st (pendulum) 15 sin7.r-I
X
2nd 8.00 sin 27r -
I
Vertical
X
1st 8.25 sin 27r -
1
X
2nd 5.84 sin 37.r -
l

TABLE
1.-RESPONSE
OF CABLE SPAN TO GUSTY WIND
Horizontal

1st
2nd

VerticaI
0.00067 04055
0.00125 10.0193 1 i
I l l l

1.3
0.6
_ _ _ _ ~ ~~ ~~

Notes
(1) From Fig. 1. (2) From eq. (45). (3) From eq. (40). (4From eqs (14) and (29).
(5) From eq. (46). (6) From eq. (19). (7) From eq. (33). (8) From eq. (41).

* Methods for their determination are given by pUgsleyl2.

STRUCTURES TO A GUSTY WIND 407
72. The calculation of the root mean square deflexion is shown in Table 1
with the following results:
Mode RMS Deflexion: f t
Horizontal 1st 12.8
2nd 3.2
Vertical 1st 1*3
2nd -6
73. The ratioof peak hourly deflexion to the RMS deflexion is found to be
approximately 3.7. Thus the peak deflexions in each mode are:
Deflexion:
PeakMode fi
Horizontal 1st 47
2nd 12
Vertical 1st 5
2nd 2
By comparison the mean deflexion is approximately
55 ft (at the mid point).

ACKNOWLEDGEMBNTS
74. The work described in the paper formed part of a Ph.D. Thesis entitled
“A statistical approach to the treatment of wind-loading of the tall mast and
suspension bridge” submitted in 1961 to the University of Bristol. During the
period of the research the Author was awarded a D.S.I.R. research fellowship.
75. Thewriterwishes to record his greatindebtedness to Professor Sir
Alfred Pugsley,O.B.E., D.Sc., F.R.S. under whose general supervision this work
was carried out, for his interest and encouragement.

REFERENCES
1. A. G. Davenport, “The application of statistical concepts to the wind loading
of structures”, Proc. Instn of civ. Engrs, vol. 19, (Aug. 1961), pp. 449472.
2. B. Baker, “The Forth Bridge”, Engineering, vol. 38, 1884, p. 213.
3. R. H. Sherlock, “Gust factors for design of buildings”, Int. Assn Bridge L Struct.
Engg, vol. 8, 1947, pp. 204-236.
4. A. G. Davenport, 1960, “Wind loads on structures”, National Research Council
of Canada, Division of Building Research, Technical Paper No. 88.
5. H. W. Liepmann,“Ontheapplicationofstatisticalconcepts to the buffeting
problem”, J. Aer. Sc’s, vol. 19, No. 12, 1952, pp. 793.
6. A.C.Eringen,“Responseofbeamsandplates to random loads”, J. Applied
Mechanics, vol. 20, 1953, pp. 461.
7. A. G . Davenport, “The spectrum of horizontal gustiness near the ground in high
winds”, Q. J. roy. Met. Soc., vol. 87, 1961, pp. 194-211.
8. H. A. Panofsky and R. A. McCormick, “The spectrum of vertical velocity near
the surface”, College of Mineral Industries, Penn. State University, 1959, (un-
published Paper).
9. H. E. Cramer, “Use of power spectra and scales of turbulence in estimating wind
loads”, unpublished Paper presented at the 2nd National Conference on Applied
Meteorology, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1958.
10. A.Baileyand N. D. G. Vincent,“Windpressureexperiments atthe Severn
Bridge”, J. Instn civ. Engrs, vol. 11, 1939, pp. 363-380.
408 DAWNPORT ON RESPONSE OF SLENDER, LINE-LIKE
STRUCTURES TO A GUSTY WIND

1I . I. A. Singer, “A study of the wind profile in the lowest400 ft of the atmosphere”.

Progress reports No. 5 and No. 9. 1960-1. Brookhaven National Laboratory,
Long Island, U.S.A.
12. A. G . Pugdey, “Theory of suspension bridges.” Edward Amold, London, 1957.

The Paperwhichwasreceived on 5 December, 1961, is accompanied by

five sheets of diagrams,from which the Figures in the text havebeen prepared.

Written discussionon this Paper shouldbe forwarded to reach the Institution

before 15 January, 1963, and will be published in or after May, 1963. Contri-
butions should not exceed 1,200 words.-%c.