Engineering Structures 46 (2013) 28–37

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Analysis of wind-induced vibration of fluid–structure interaction system

for isolated aqueduct bridge
Hua Zhang a,b,1, Liang Liu a, Ming Dong a, Hao Sun b,⇑
a
College of Civil and Transportation Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China
b
Department of Civil Engineering and Engineering Mechanics, Columbia University, NY 10027, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper studies the dynamic properties of aqueduct–water coupling system in bent-type aqueduct
Received 17 April 2012 structures using the Arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian (ALE) method. A three-dimensional fluid–structure
Revised 18 July 2012 interaction model was established, with plate rubber supports. The speed-time sequence of fluctuating
Accepted 29 July 2012
wind acting on the aqueduct was simulated by the Auto-regressive Moving Average (ARMA) model.
The natural vibration characteristics, seismic responses, and wind responses of the aqueduct structure
were calculated and comparatively analyzed in different conditions of water depth. The simulation
Keywords:
results show that the application of isolation technology can reduce aqueduct stiffness and change the
Isolated aqueduct bridge
ARMA model
vibration characteristics of an aqueduct structure. The application of isolated technique is able to elevate
Fluid–structure interaction the earthquake resistance performance of aqueduct structure. However, the isolation remarkably
Wind response increases the wind stress response and reduces wind resistance performance of the aqueduct bridge.
Seismic response Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction to large displacements and stresses under strong winds. Therefore,

Aqueducts are important hydraulic structures for water trans-
fer, which have been widely used in many countries all over the
world, especially in China. For instance, many large span aqueducts
have been built in the South-to-North Convey projects in China
since 2003. With the scale of aqueducts becoming larger and lar-
ger, e.g. the Dongshen Aqueduct (Fig. 1) with the height of 25 m
and the length of 20.4 m for each span built in Hunan province,
China, the safety of the aqueduct structures under wind loads
has been an important subject of research. Though dozens of aque-
ducts have been destroyed by winds since the 1980s in China [1,2],
research on their dynamic performance, especially on wind-
induced properties, is limited. Wind loads have usually been
regarded as static loads in past aqueduct research [2,3]. However,
the fluctuating effects of wind not only influence aqueduct life,
but also might cause structural resonance in some cases, which
would increase the danger of structural damage. Isolated supports
are commonly installed to enhance earthquake resistance of
aqueduct structures in seismic design [4–6]. Nevertheless, the
isolation might reduce the stiffness of the aqueducts, which,
to some extent, would cause structural instability or failure due
⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Department of Civil Engineering and
Engineering Mechanics, Columbia University, 610 S.W. Mudd Building, 500 West
120th Street, New York, NY 10027, USA. Tel.: +1 646 853 3985.
E-mail address: hs2595@columbia.edu (H. Sun).
1
Visiting scholar at Columbia University from 09/2011 to 09/2012.
this study on wind-induced vibration of isolated aqueducts is prac-
tically significant in wind resistant design.
Bridges and buildings are mainly affected by the near-earth
wind, especially by properties of atmospheric boundary layers.
Such winds can be divided into average wind and fluctuating wind
in practical engineering. The average wind pressure on buildings is
calculated based on the basic wind speed, the surface roughness,
the height and the shape of structures. The fluctuating wind can
be treated as a steady Gauss stochastic process if the initial unstea-
dy process of wind speed records is ignored. The Auto-regressive
Moving Average (ARMA) model can be used to simulate the steady
Gauss stochastic wind field, which can take into account the spatial
correlativity, and is able to efficiently and rapidly simulate large
samples to meet the needs of engineering [7,8].
Water sloshing under earthquake and wind loads will affect the
dynamic response of aqueduct structures to some extent [4,6,9].
Meanwhile, the coupling effects between water and aqueduct can-
not be neglected in the dynamic analysis [9,10]. Considering
water–aqueduct interaction, methods of calculating aqueduct
dynamic properties in past research mainly consist of the addi-
tional mass method, Housner model method, boundary element
method and Arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian (ALE) finite element
method [10–15]. The additional mass method considered water
as an added mass of the structure, ignoring the effects of water
sloshing, and thus yielding inaccurate calculating results. Housner
[12] proposed a Housner spring mass model to avoid the difficul-
ties of solving Laplace equation and infinite series, but with a

0141-0296/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.07.019
 H. Zhang et al. / Engineering Structures 46 (2013) 28–37 29

mapped in the reference coordinate system by Jacobian determi-

nant. Uchiyama [17] presented each description of reference
frames of Lagrangian method, Eulerian methods and ALE method.
Hence, the ALE method can be applied to solve the compatibility
of the fluid structure interface in the case of large amplitude water
sloshing [18].
For a quarry point in the referential coordinate system, an
expression of f, a function of (v, t), is called the referential descrip-
tion. The change in the transport variable at a point v moving with
the reference frame can be written as:
 
@f ðv; tÞ @f @f ðX; tÞ
þ ðu_  _
u Þ ¼ ð1Þ
@t  @t 
1
v @x X

where X denotes the material coordinate system; x the special coor-

dinate system; and v the referential coordinate system; u_ the mate-
rial velocity and u_ 1 the velocity of the reference coordinate system.
The derivative not only accounts for the motion of the material, but
also the motion of the reference frame. In the referential description
Eq. (1) the case of u_ ¼ u_ 1 corresponds to the Lagrange description
and the case of u_ 1 ¼ 0 yields the Euler description.

2.2. ALE equations for fluid flow

Fig. 1. Dongshen aqueduct in China. The motion of an incompressible viscous fluid, described by do-
main X, is governed by a set of partial differential equations that
are derived from the laws of the conservation of mass (continuity)
low calculating accuracy of the connection of spring oscillator and
and the conservation of momentum. The Navier–Stokes equations
the aqueduct body. Boundary element method was used to analyze
of the fluid in the ALE description can be written as follows
water sloshing height and the distribution of velocity potential in
[15,18,19].
[16], however, effects of the aqueduct on the water is not analyzed.
In the ALE method, the grid can be moved to follow boundary mo-
 Continuity equation:
tion, resolve complex flow features, and prevent the grid from tan-
gling. The study results in [11] show that the ALE method can give @ u_ b
¼0 ð2Þ
a full consideration of the coupling effects of both water and struc- @xb
ture in solving the nonlinear fluid–solid coupling problem.
 Momentum equation:
In order to fully take into account the impact of the isolated
support on the wind-induced dynamic performance of the @ u_ a @ u_ b @ sab
water–aqueduct coupling system, a three-dimensional finite ele- þ ðu_ b  u_ 1b Þ ¼ þ fB ð3Þ
@t @xb @xb
ment model of an isolated aqueduct structure is introduced in this
paper. The ARMA model is used to simulate the fluctuating wind where the subscripts a and b represent the three spatial coordinate
speed time series. The dynamic characteristics of the aqueduct– components and represented indices imply summation; u_ a is the
water coupling system are studied by using the ALE method. fluid velocity component; fB is the body force. The term of
Dynamic responses of the water–aqueduct coupling system under pseudo-stress is defined as:
lateral earthquake and wind loads, respectively, are calculated in
order to study the different influences of the isolated support on @ u_ a @ u_ b
seismic and wind resistance of the aqueduct structure. This work sab ¼ Pdab þ ðl þ lt Þ þ lt ð4Þ
@xb @xa
can provide scientific basis for the wind resistance design of iso-
lated aqueducts. where P = p/q is the kinematic pressure; p the static pressure; q the
This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 proposes the fluid density; dab the Kronecker delta; l and lt the dynamic viscos-
fundamental equations of fluid–solid coupling system. Section 3 ity and dynamic eddy viscosity, respectively.
presents the stochastic wind field simulation based on the AR mod- To apply the weighted residuals to the Eqs. (2) and (3), multiply
el and the ARMA model. Section 4 gives the numerical simulation each equation by a test (weight) function, where use function w1
analysis. The last part, Section 5, offers discussions and for the mass Eq. (2) and w2 for the momentum Eq. (3). Finally,
conclusions. the weak form of the mass and momentum equations are as
follows:
Z
2. Fundamental equations of fluid–solid coupling system @ u_ b
w1 dX ¼ 0 ð5Þ
X @xb
2.1. ALE description
Z Z Z
@ u_ a @ u_ a @w2
w2 dX þ w2 ðu_ b  u_ 1b Þ dX  P dX
The ALE method is a hybrid method comprising Lagrangian and X @t X @x b X @xa
Eulerian methods. In the implementation of ALE, the mesh is gen- Z I Z
@ u_ a @w2
erated in a reference coordinate system which is independent of þ ð l þ lt Þ dX  w2 nb sab dC  w2 f B dX ¼ 0 ð6Þ
X @xb @xb @X X
the structure and fluid movement. The mesh node denotes the ref-
erence node, which can move arbitrarily in space. The physical where nb is the b component of the surface outward unit normal
H
quantities in the fluid and structure domain can be described and vector and () indicates an integral over the surface boundary.
30 H. Zhang et al. / Engineering Structures 46 (2013) 28–37

Z
2.3. The Galerkin form for fluid equation
mij ¼ wiu_ wju_ dX ð16Þ
X
The approximation of velocity and pressure can be defined
 Diffusion:
using the Finite Element Method (FEM) as a linear combination 2 3
of the basis functions of wu_ and wP in the discretized domain Xh. kij ðxxÞ kij ðxyÞ kij ðxzÞ
X
N 6 7
K ¼ 4 kij ðyxÞ kij ðyyÞ kij ðyzÞ 5 ð17Þ
u_ a ðx; y; zÞ ¼ u_ ja ðtÞwju_ ðx; y; zÞ ð7Þ
j¼1
kij ðzxÞ kij ðzyÞ kij ðzzÞ
X
M
Z !
Pðx; y; zÞ ¼ Pj ðtÞwjP ðx; y; zÞ ð8Þ @wju_ @wiu_ @wju_ @wju_
j¼1
kij ðabÞ ¼ dab ðl þ lt Þ þ lt dX ð18Þ
X @xb @xb @xa @xb
where N and M are the total number of velocity nodes and pressure
nodes. The substitution of Eqs. (7) and (8) into (5) and (6) yields:  Advection:
Z !
@wju_ K  ¼ kðu_  u_ 1 Þ ¼ diagðnij Þ; nij
w1 dXh u_ jb ¼ 0 ð9Þ Z
Xh @xb @wju_
¼ ðu_  u_ 1 Þ wju_ wku_ dX ð19Þ
" # X @xb
Z  Z
@ u_ a j
@wju_
w2 wju_ dXh þ ðu_ b  u_ 1 Þ w2 wku_ dXh u_ ja  Gradient:
X h @t Xh @xb
Z
  " # T @wiu_
j @w2 j @wju_ @w2 j C ¼ ½ cij ð1Þ cij ð2Þ cij ð3Þ  ; cij ðaÞ ¼  wjP dX ð20Þ
 wP P þ ðl þ lt Þ u_ X @xa
@xa @xb @xb a
Z ! I  Force vector:
@wju_ @w2 h j I Z
þ l t dX u_ b  w2 nb sab dC F ¼ ½ fi ð1Þ fi ð2Þ fi ð3Þ  ; f i ðaÞ ¼
T
wiu_ nb sab dC  wiu_ f B dX ð21Þ
Xh @xa @xb @ Xh @X X
Z
 w2 f B dXh
Xh As discussed in the previous section, the approximate solution
¼0 ð10Þ is expressed as a function of a set of basis functions, i.e., shape
The above system contains 3N velocity unknowns and M pres- functions. An arbitrary function u as a linear combination of the
sure unknowns. We can obtain the essential number of equations shape functions can be expressed as:
by introducing one weighting function per unknown. According Ne
X
to the Galerkin method, the weight functions are chosen to be u N i ui ð22Þ
the same as the basic functions which are used to define the i¼1

approximate solution. So we define w1 ¼ wiP and w2 ¼ wiu_ and apply where Ni is a globally defined shape function; Ne the number of ele-
this method to Eqs. (9) and (10) yields: ment; and the coefficients ui the unknown nodal values. Hence, for
Z !
@wju_ any node j:
dX u_ jb ¼ 0
h
ð11Þ
Xh @xb Ne
X
uj ¼ uðxj Þ  Ni ðxj Þui ð23Þ
Z  " Z # i¼1
@ u_ ja @wju_
wiu_ wju_ dXh þ ðu_ b  u_ 1 Þ wiu_ wku_ dXh u_ ja The element of eight nodes was chosen in this paper [20]. The
Xh @t Xh @xb
" # " # velocity shape functions in terms of the eight nodes element’s
i j i
@w @w @wu_ j parametric coordinates (n, g, f) are given as:
 wjP u_ Pj þ ðl þ lt Þ u_ u_
@xa @xb @xb a 1 1
"Z # N1 ðn; g;fÞ ¼ ð1  nÞð1  gÞð1  fÞ;N 2 ðn; g;fÞ ¼ ð1 þ nÞð1  gÞð1  fÞ
I Z 8 8
@wju_ @wiu_
þ l t dX u_ jb 
h
wiu_ nb sab dC  wiu_ f B dXh 1 1
N3 ðn; g;fÞ ¼ ð1 þ nÞð1 þ gÞð1  fÞ;N 4 ðn; g;fÞ ¼ ð1  nÞð1 þ gÞð1  fÞ
Xh @xa @xb @ Xh Xh 8 8 ð24Þ
1 1
¼0 ð12Þ N5 ðn; g;fÞ ¼ ð1  nÞð1  gÞð1 þ fÞ;N 6 ðn; g;fÞ ¼ ð1 þ nÞð1  gÞð1 þ fÞ
8 8
which has 3N + M ordinary differential equations. 1 1
N7 ðn; g;fÞ ¼ ð1 þ nÞð1 þ gÞð1 þ fÞ;N 8 ðn; g;fÞ ¼ ð1  nÞð1 þ gÞð1 þ fÞ
8 8
2.4. Matrix form for fluid equation And the pressure shape functions are:

The Eqs. (11) and (12) can be written as a matrix form as NP ðn; g; fÞ ¼ 1 ð25Þ
follows: The derivatives of the shape functions in terms of the global
€ þ ðK þ K  Þu_ þ CP ¼ F
Mu ð13Þ coordinate system can be expressed in matrix form as:
C T u_ ¼ 0 ð14Þ  T  T
@Ni @Ni @Ni @N i @N i @N i
@n @g @f ¼J @x @y @z
ð26Þ
where the matrices are computed from integrals of the shape func-
tions. The definitions of these matrices are given below. where J is the Jacobian matrix. Therefore, the matrix of Eq. (13) can
be evaluated by the transformation:
 Mass: Z Z
2 3 udX ¼ uðx; y; zÞdx dy dz
mij 0 0 Xe Xe
6 7 Z Z Z
M¼4 0 mij 0 5 ð15Þ 1 1 1

0 0 mij
¼ uðn; g; fÞjJjdndgdf ð27Þ
1 1 1
 H. Zhang et al. / Engineering Structures 46 (2013) 28–37 31

where jJj is the determinant of J. The stress criterion:

 
 k 
2.5. Dynamic equations for the structure sf  sfk1 
rs  n   o 6 es ð32Þ
 
max skf ; e0
Since the interaction effects of the fluid–structure interface in
the coupling system should be included in the dynamic equation, The displacement criterion:
the matrix form of dynamic equation which is derived from the  k 
x  xk1 
weak form and Galerkin form of dynamic equation for the aque- rx  s
 s 6 ex ð33Þ
duct structure can be expressed as [21,22]: max xk ; e0
s

€ ðtÞ þ C uðtÞ
Mu _ þ KuðtÞ ¼ PðtÞ þ Pf ðtÞ ð28Þ where es and ex are tolerances for stress and displacement conver-
gence, respectively. The calculation procedure of the iterative
_
where uðtÞ; uðtÞ € ðtÞ are the displacement, velocity and acceler-
and u fluid–structure coupling method is shown in Fig. 2.
ation vectors at time t, respectively. P(t) is the transient external
load vector, which is the earthquake or wind load. Pf(t) is the fluid
force on the structure. M, K and C are the mass stiffness and damp- 3. Stochastic wind field simulation
ing matrices, respectively. The Rayleigh damping matrix used in this
paper is defined as: Turbulent wind can be described by Gaussian steady process
C ¼ ar M þ br K ð29Þ according to the statistical analysis of wind samples. The stochastic
wind field on membrane structures is synthesized in this study
where ar and br are the proportional damping coefficients of mass based on the power spectrum density (PSD) of wind velocity and
and stiffness. an Auto-regressive Moving-Average (ARMA) model. The merit of
the ARMA model is that it uses few parameters to approximate a
2.6. Coupling system equation and solving method target PSD [23,24].
The target PSD of the turbulent wind velocity can be expressed
Fluid–structure interaction occurs when fluid flow cause defor- by the Davenport power spectrum as follows [25]:
mation of the structure. This deformation, in return, changes the
4x2 u2
boundary conditions of the fluid flow. Under earthquake or wind SV ðnÞ ¼ ð34Þ
loads, movement of the aqueduct on the coupling interface leads nð1 þ x2 Þ4=3
to the sloshing of water, and the dynamic water pressure acts on 1200 nz
x¼ ; f ¼ ð35Þ
the aqueduct wall on the interface which changes the distribution zf VðzÞ
of deformation and stress of the aqueduct. The fluid and structure 0:4VðzÞ
material only interact their interface. Hence, the coupling occurs u ¼ ð36Þ
lnðz=z0 Þ
through the boundary conditions. The fluid and structure on the
coupling interface satisfy the conditions of displacements continu-
ity and equilibrium of forces.

 Displacements continuity:

u_ f ¼ u_ s ð30Þ
 Equilibrium of forces:

rf nf  rs ns ¼ 0 ð31Þ
where u_ f and u_ s are the fluid velocity and the structure velocity on
the interface, respectively; rf and rs are the fluid stress and the
structure stress on the interface, respectively; nf and ns are the unit
outward normal vectors of the fluid and of the structure on the
interface, respectively.

The fluid equation and structure equation are unified to get the
finite element equation of the coupled fluid–structure system. The
iterative fluid–structure coupling method is used to solve the cou-
pling system in this paper. In this method, the fluid and structure
equations are solved individually, in succession, always using the
latest information provided by the other part of the coupling sys-
tem, which might be more applicable to solve very large problems
than the direct fluid–structure coupling method.
The coupling system is solved at each instant of time using the
incremental Newton–Raphson solution method. The solution vari-
ables of the fluid and structure are coupling, so the fluid equation
and the structure equation at each time step can be solved by iter-
ation in turn until the solutions of the coupling system are conver-
gent. For each time step, the displacements of the fluid structure
interface node may update the entire fluid mesh and change the
ALE velocity at each node. Criteria that are based on stress and dis-
placement are used to check for convergence of the iterations. Fig. 2. The procedure of the iterative fluid–structure coupling method.
32 H. Zhang et al. / Engineering Structures 46 (2013) 28–37

where f is Monin coordinate; VðzÞ is the average wind velocity and 4. Numerical analysis
z0 = 0.03 m is the ground roughness. Then the correlation function is
thus obtained: 4.1. A 3-D calculation model of the coupling system
Z xc
C ij ðkÞ ¼ 2 S0ij ðxÞ cosðkxsÞdx ði; j ¼ 1; 2; . . . nÞ ð37Þ The 3-D model of a large bent-frame rectangular aqueduct with
0
plate rubber bearings is introduced as shown in Fig. 3. The dynamic
where s is the sample time and x = 2pn is the cut off frequency. characteristics of the aqueduct–water coupling system are studied
using the ALE method. The span L of the aqueduct is 10 m; the
3.1. M-dimensional finite auto-regressive (AR) model height H1 of the H-shaped supporting frame is 24 m; the width B
is 7.0 m; the depth H2 is 5.6 m; the thickness is 0.5 m; the width
An m-dimensional discrete time sequence Yr (r = 1, 2, . . .) is writ- and height of the tie bar are 0.3 m and 0.4 m, respectively. The
ten as: aqueduct body and supporting frame are built using C50 and C30
concrete, respectively. For the C50 concrete, Young’s modulus E
X
P
e i Y ri , B0 X r
A ð38Þ is 3.45 104 MPa and Poisson’s ratio l is 0.167; and for the C30
i¼0 concrete, Young’s modulus E is 3.00 104 MPa and Poisson’s ratio
e i and B0 are coefficient matrices obtained by the predefined l is 0.167.
where A
The water and the structure are modeled using 3-D fluid ele-
auto-correlation function CYY(k); Xr is a normalized Gaussian white
ments and solid elements, respectively. The plate rubber bearing
noise sequence, with the auto-correlation function satisfying:
is installed between the aqueduct body and supported frame.

1 k¼0 The rubber constitutive relation is modeled by Mooney–Rivlin

C XX ðkÞ , ð39Þ
0 k–0 strain energy density function. The bottom of the framed supports
and the displacements in the X-direction of the tank are fixed. The
and B0 is evaluated by: fluid–structure coupling boundary condition is applied on the
X
P interface of the aqueduct and water, and the cross-section of the
B0 BT0 ¼ e i C YY ðiÞ
A ð40Þ inlet and outlet water is modeled by wall boundary condition. In
i¼0
addition, half of the structure and water masses of the adjacent
It is also necessary for the ARMA model to determine the cross- spans are added to the top of the supported frame in order to con-
correlation function CYX(k) (k P 0), which can be obtained by sider the influence of the adjacent spans of the aqueduct.
the following recursive equation:
X
P
C YX ðkÞ ¼  Ae i C YX ði  kÞ ð41Þ 4.2. Analysis of the dynamic characteristics
i¼1
The vibration mode of the aqueduct–water coupling system
consists of the structure mode and the fluid mode. In this simula-
3.2. M-dimensional Auto-regressive Moving-Average (ARMA) model
tion, the natural frequencies of the aqueduct model with rigid
bearing and the rubber isolated bearing under no water and water
Similarly, an m-dimensional discrete time sequence Yr
depth of 2.748 m are respectively analyzed. Comparison results are
(r = 1, 2,   ) can be written as:
summarized in Table 1. It can be seen that, with the depth of water
X
q X
q in the aqueduct increasing, the structure’s natural frequency de-
Ai Y ri , Bi X ri ð42Þ creases. The vibration period of the aqueduct with isolated bearing
i¼0 i¼0
is 1.74 times larger than that of the aqueduct with rigid bearing
where Ai and Bi are AR and MA coefficient matrices respectively. Un- under no water, which shows that the rubber isolated bearing re-
der the assumption of equivalence between the infinite AR model duces structural stiffness and lengthens structural vibration
and the finite ARMA model, Eq. (38) is equivalent to the following period.
infinite AR model: Considering the similarity between dry modes and wet modes,
X
1 we show only the first five dry vibration mode of the aqueduct
Ai Y ri , B0 X r ð43Þ model with rigid bearing and the rubber isolated bearing under
i¼0
no water as shown in Fig. 4. It can be observed in Fig. 3 that the first
where Ai and Bi (i = 1, 2, . . . ,q) can be obtained by the following vibration mode is a lateral mode, and the deflection of the frame
equations: support is large in every vibration mode. Since the lateral stiffness
½ B1 B2  Bq A1 A2  Aq  of the aqueduct and the stiffness of the frame support are small,
T 1 the aqueduct could potentially collapse in the transverse direction.
¼ ½ C YX ð1Þ C YX ð2Þ  C YX ðqÞ C YY ð1Þ C YY ð2Þ  C YY ðqÞ  ½DB
Historic aqueducts have been destroyed when subjected to earth-
ð44Þ quake and wind loads. Furthermore, from the first three modes
where of the aqueduct with isolated support, the deformations of both
2 3 the aqueduct body and supporting frame are small, while the
 In 0 C TYX ð0Þ  0
6 7 deflection of the isolated support is large. Therefore, the applica-
6 .. .. .. .. .. .. 7 tion of isolation technology can significantly reduce vibration re-
6 . . . . . . 7
6 7 sponses of an aqueduct structure.
6  0 In C TYX ðqÞ    C TYX ð0Þ 7
6
½DB ¼ 6 7
6 C YX ð0Þ    C YX ð1  qÞ C YY ð0Þ    C YY ðq  1Þ 77
6 .. .. .. .. .. .. 7
6 7
4 . . . . . . 5 4.3. Dynamic response analysis
0  C YX ð0Þ C YY ðq  1Þ  C YY ð0Þ
The El-Centro earthquake record (shown in Fig. 5) is employed
ð45Þ
as a known ground excitation to the aqueduct structure in the Y-
A sample function of Yr can thus be generated by Eq. (38). direction. The peak of the seismic wave is set as 2.0 m/s2 according
 H. Zhang et al. / Engineering Structures 46 (2013) 28–37
Fig. 3. Diagram of finite element model of aqueduct: (a) aqueduct structure and (b) water body.
Table 1
The natural frequencies of vibration of the aqueduct (unit: Hz).
No. Rigid bearing
No water Water depth of 2.748 m
1 1.414 1.262
2 4.975 4.909
3 7.477 7.381
4 8.023 7.885
5 13.594 13.304
to the local geographic and geologic conditions. In this analysis the
duration T is 16 s, and the time step Dt is 0.02 s.
The local basic wind pressure is 0.35 kN/m2. The fluctuating
wind speed time series at different heights of the aqueduct struc-
ture is simulated by using the Auto-regressive Moving Average
(ARMA) model. The Davenport power spectrum is employed as
the target spectrum. In this analysis, the duration T is 120 s, and
time step Dt is 0.1 s. Seven fluctuating wind speed time series at
different heights of aqueduct structure are obtained by MATLAB
simulation. Fig. 6 shows the time history of fluctuating wind veloc-
ity at the top of the aqueduct (30.8 m above ground).
Fig. 7 compares the power spectrum between the simulation re-
sult and the target. It can be seen that fit agreement is good be-
tween the two curves in Fig. 7, which indicates the fluctuating
wind is effectively simulated by ARMA model. The time history
of wind pressure at different heights of the aqueduct structure
can be obtained by adding the simulated fluctuating wind speed
and average wind speed according to the relationship between
wind speed and wind pressure P = 0.5qV2 (q is the density of the
atmosphere). Fig. 8 shows the time history of fluctuating wind
pressure at the top of the aqueduct.
4.3.1. Dynamic displacement analysis
The displacements under the earthquake wave (El-Centro) and
wind load are respectively calculated and analyzed under the fol-
lowing six working conditions: water depth of 1.939 m, 2.748 m,
3.248 m, 3.748 m, 4.248 m, and no water in the aqueduct. Figs. 9
and 10 respectively show the time history of transversal displace-
ments at the top of the aqueduct with rigid and isolated bearing of
33
Isolated bearing
No water Water depth of 2.748 m
0.862 0.845
2.406 2.387
3.994 3.775
6.273 6.135
10.557 10.461
the water depth 3.748 m. According to the displacement curves,
the application of isolation technology can increase the maximum
transversal displacement of the aqueduct.
Figs. 11 and 12 respectively show the maximum transversal dis-
placement curves at the top of the aqueduct in different water
depth conditions under earthquake action and wind load. It can
be observed from Figs. 11 and 12, with the depth of water in aque-
duct increasing, the maximum transversal displacement of the
structure increases. Furthermore, for the aqueduct with water
depth of 3.748 m, the displacements of the isolated aqueduct un-
der the earthquake and the wind effect are larger than those of
the aqueduct with rigid bearing by 2.6 times and 2.5 times, respec-
tively. Hence, the application of isolation reduces the stiffness of
the aqueduct and increases the seismic and wind displacement
response.
4.3.2. Dynamic stress analysis
The dynamic stresses under the earthquake wave (El-Centro)
and wind load are respectively calculated and analyzed under
the following three working conditions: water depth of 2.748 m,
3.748 m and no water in the aqueduct. Figs. 13 and 14 respectively
show the major principal stress of middle cross-section of the
aqueduct with rigid and isolated bearing, with water depth
3.748 m.
From Figs. 13 and 14, we find that the distribution pattern of the
main stresses of the aqueduct with rigid bearing and isolated bear-
ing are similar. The maximum stress occurs at the outer bottom of
the aqueduct tank caused by the sloshing water. Meanwhile, the
stresses on both sidewalls are also large because of the coupling
34 H. Zhang et al. / Engineering Structures 46 (2013) 28–37

Fig. 4. The mode of vibration of the aqueduct: (a) rigid bearing and (b) isolated bearing.

Fig. 7. Comparison of the power spectrum between the simulation result and the
Fig. 5. Diagram of the El-Centro seismic wave. target.

Fig. 6. Time history of fluctuating wind velocity at the top of the aqueduct. Fig. 8. Time history of fluctuating wind load at the top of the aqueduct.
 H. Zhang et al. / Engineering Structures 46 (2013) 28–37
Fig. 9. Curves of transversal displacement at the top of the aqueduct with water depth of 3.748 m under earthquake action: (a) rigid bearing and (b) isolated bearing.
Fig. 10. Curves of transversal displacement at the top of the aqueduct with water depth of 3.748 m under wind load: (a) rigid bearing and (b) isolated bearing.
Fig. 11. Curves of maximum transversal displacement at the top of the aqueduct
with different water depth conditions under earthquake action.
Fig. 12. Curves of maximum transversal displacement at the top of the aqueduct
with different water depth conditions under wind load.
35
effect of the aqueduct and water. Furthermore, the application of
isolation enhances earthquake resistance of the aqueduct struc-
ture, but isolation remarkably increases the wind stress response
and reduces wind resistance. This is caused by the difference of
the loading mechanism between the wind and the earthquake
excitations. The wind loads act on the aqueduct in the form of sto-
chastic wind pressure, while the earthquake excitation in the form
of acceleration seismic wave. It seems that the isolated bearing
contributes to the dissipation of earthquake energy, yet has small
or negative impact on the dissipation of wind energy.
The principal stresses under the earthquake wave (El-Centro)
and wind load with water depth of 2.748 m, 3.748 m and no water
in the aqueduct are respectively shown in Table 2. It can be seen in
Table 2, with the depth of water in the aqueduct increasing, the
major principal stress on the structure increases. Under the earth-
quake wave, the stresses of the aqueduct with isolated bearing are
smaller than those of the aqueduct without isolated bearing. The
stresses on the bar, tank and the framed support reduce respec-
tively by 17.5%, 27.6% and 15.5%. However, under the wind load,
the stresses on the aqueduct with isolated bearing are much larger
than those of the aqueduct without isolated bearing. The stresses
on the bar, tank and the framed support increase respectively by
16.8%, 20.5% and 13.9%.
5. Conclusions
(1) The first vibration mode of the aqueduct is a lateral mode,
and the deflection of the frame support is large in every
vibration mode. Since the lateral stiffness of the aqueduct
and the stiffness of the frame support are small, the aque-
duct shows potential for collapse in the transverse direction.
This has been the cause of aqueduct collapse in historic
36 H. Zhang et al. / Engineering Structures 46 (2013) 28–37

Fig. 13. Major principal stress of middle cross-section of the aqueduct with water depth of 3.748 m under earthquake action (unit: MPa): (a) rigid bearing and (b) isolated
bearing.

Fig. 14. Major principal stress of middle cross-section of the aqueduct with water depth of 3.748 m under wind load (unit: MPa): (a) rigid bearing and (b) isolated bearing.

Table 2
Major principal stress on the aqueduct under different water level conditions (unit: MPa).

Excitation Location Rigid bearing Isolated bearing

No water 2.748 m 3.748 m No water 2.748 m 3.748 m
Earthquake wave Bar 0.950 1.543 1.689 0.823 1.273 1.565
Outer wall of tank 1.305 2.020 2.538 1.153 1.715 1.908
Inner wall of tank 0.607 1.507 2.030 0.442 1.090 1.557
Column of bent 0.412 0.594 0.824 0.348 0.557 0.715
Beam of bent 0.710 1.145 1.322 0.605 0.951 1.193
Wind load Bar 0.721 0.926 1.200 0.842 1.002 1.242
Outer wall of tank 1.283 1.490 1.704 1.389 1.663 1.960
Inner wall of tank 1.004 1.379 1.556 1.210 1.500 1.797
Column of bent 0.540 0.685 0.830 0.633 0.810 0.918
Beam of bent 0.668 0.804 1.057 0.784 0.916 1.140

earthquake and wind load events. The application of isola-
tion technology can reduce aqueduct structural stiffness
and lengthen the vibration period.
(2) With the depth of water in the aqueduct increasing, the
maximum transversal displacements of structure under
earthquake excitation and wind load also increase. The dis-
placements of the isolated aqueduct under the earthquake
and the wind effects are larger than those of the aqueduct
with rigid bearing. This means damping equipment or bum-
per blocks should be used to reduce the displacement
response in a seismic or wind event.
(3) Because of the sloshing water, the stresses on both sidewalls
under outer excitement are large, so the coupling effect of
the aqueduct and water should be taken into account. Fur-
thermore, the application of isolated technique elevates
earthquake resistance performance of an aqueduct struc-
ture. However, the application of isolation technology
remarkably increases the wind stress response and reduces
wind resistance. In the application of seismic isolation tech-
nology, appropriate measures should be taken, to permit the
isolated bearings function, while ensuring the normal capac-
ity of the isolated aqueduct under strong winds.
Acknowledgement
The work was supported by the grants from the National
Natural Science Foundation of China (Project No. 50709006) and
the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of
China (Project No. 2010B04014) which is greatly acknowledged.
 H. Zhang et al. / Engineering Structures 46 (2013) 28–37 37

References [14] Bermudez A, Duran R, Rodriguez R. Finite element solution of incompressible

fluid–structure vibration problems. Int J Numer Meth Eng 1997;40(8):
1435–48.
[1] Li YC, Luo ML. Dynamic characteristics of fluid–structure interaction system for
[15] Filipovic N et al. An implicit algorithm within the arbitrary Lagrangian–
bent-type aqueduct. J Hydraul Eng 2000;31(11):31–7.
Eulerian formulation for solving incompressible fluid flow with large boundary
[2] Pan DG, Luo ML, Li YC. Case study of a wind-destroyed aqueduct. J Hydraul Eng
motions. Comput Method Appl Mech Eng 2006;195(44–47):6347–61.
2001;32(9):92–6.
[16] Nakayama T, Washizu K. The boundary element method applied to the
[3] An XW, Duan CX, Zhang YM. Study on reliability of displacement controlled of
analysis of two-dimensional non-linear sloshing problems. Int J Numer Meth
aqueduct structure system under wind load. J Yangtze River Sci Res Inst
Eng 1981;17(11):1631–46.
2009;26(5).
[17] Uchiyama T. ALE finite element method for gas–liquid two-phase flow
[4] Li YC, Lou ML, Pan DG. Evaluation of vertical seismic response for a large-scale
including moving boundary based on an incompressible two-fluid model.
beam-supported aqueduct. Earthq Eng Struct 2003;32(1):1–14.
Nucl Eng Des 2001;205(1-2):69–82.
[5] Davis C, O’Rourke T. ShakeOut scenario: water system impacts from a M(w) 7.8
[18] Al-Amiri A, Khanafer K. Fluid–structure interaction analysis of mixed
San Andreas earthquake. Earthq Spectra 2011;27(2):459–76.
convection heat transfer in a lid-driven cavity with a flexible bottom wall.
[6] Wu Y, Mo HH, Yang C. Study on dynamic performance of a three-dimensional
Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2011;54(17-18):3826–36.
high frame supported U-shaped aqueduct. Eng Struct 2006;28(3):372–80.
[19] Souli M, Zolesio JP. Arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian and free surface methods in
[7] Di Paola M. Digital simulation of wind field velocity. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod
fluid mechanics. Comput Method Appl Mech Eng 2001;191(3-5):451–66.
1998;74-6:91–109.
[20] Gresho PM et al. A modified finite-element method for solving the time-
[8] Erdem E, Shi J. ARMA based approaches for forecasting the tuple of wind speed
dependent, incompressible Navier–Stokes equations. 2. Applications. Int J
and direction. Appl Energy 2011;88(4):1405–14.
Numer Meth Fl 1984;4(7):619–40.
[9] Kock E, Olson L. Fluid structure interaction analysis by the finite-element
[21] Weaver W, Johnston PR. Structural dynamics by finite elements. Prentice-Hall
method – a variational approach. Int J Numer Meth Eng 1991;31(3):463–91.
civil engineering and engineering mechanics series, vol. xii. Englewood Cliffs
[10] Sigrist JF, Broc D. Fluid–structure interaction effects modeling for the modal
(NJ): Prentice-Hall; 1987. p. 591.
analysis of a steam generator tube bundle. J Press Vess – Trans Asme
[22] Mork KJ. Response analysis of reinforced-concrete structures under seismic
2009;131(3).
excitation. Earthq Eng Struct 1994;23(1):33–48.
[11] Kim JM, Chang SH, Yun CB. Fluid–structure–soil interaction analysis of
[23] Shinozuka M, Yun CB, Seya H. Stochastic methods in wind engineering. J Wind
cylindrical liquid storage tanks subjected to horizontal earthquake loading.
Eng Ind Aerodyn 1990;36(1-3):829–43.
Struct Eng Mech 2002;13(6):615–38.
[24] Kamal L, Jafri YZ. Time series models to simulate and forecast hourly averaged
[12] Housner G. The dynamic behavior of water tanks. Bull Seismol Am
wind speed in Quetta, Pakistan. Sol Energy 1997;61(1):23–32.
1963;53(2):381–7.
[25] Davenport AG. The spectrum of horizontal gustiness near the ground in high
[13] Li YC LM. Action of fluid on aqueduct body during strong earthquake. J Hydraul
winds. Quart J Roy Meteorol Soc 1961;87(372):194–211.
Eng 2000;31(3):46–52.