Failure of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Rasine
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bridge Failure
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The collapse of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge was primarily caused by single-degree-of-freedom torsional flutter, a form of aerodynamic resonance. The bridge's design was susceptible to oscillations induced by wind vortices that matched its natural frequency, leading to significant amplitude oscillations. Despite the wind speed being below the bridge's designed tolerance, the complex interplay of aerodynamic forces and torsional motion contributed to the failure. Recent studies indicate that the phenomenon is more intricate than mere resonance, necessitating a deeper understanding of the underlying physics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of torsional flutter dynamics
  • Familiarity with aerodynamic resonance principles
  • Knowledge of differential equations related to oscillatory motion
  • Basic concepts of structural engineering and bridge design
NEXT STEPS
  • Research "aerodynamic resonance in suspension bridges"
  • Study "Large-amplitude Periodic Oscillations in Suspension Bridges" by Lazer and McKenna
  • Examine the role of differential equations in bridge oscillation analysis
  • Explore modern engineering solutions to mitigate torsional flutter
USEFUL FOR

Structural engineers, physics students, and anyone interested in the dynamics of bridge design and failure analysis will benefit from this discussion.

Rasine
Messages
208
Reaction score
0
i am, thus, attempting to understand the physics of the collapse of the Tacoma Narrows.

can please explain what i have found to be the cause of the final distruction: single-degree-of-freedom torsional flutter?

or if you know anything else about this event, please explain!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If i remember the problem had to do with resonance, You see the winds were making vortices with the same natural frequency of the bridge, thus making the deck of the bridge oscillate with a rather huge amplitude. Another fact is that the wind making the resonance had a speed less than what the bridge was made to handle.
 
"torsional flutter" is a way of describing, essentially, aerodynamic resonance. Its the same as when you drop a piece of paper and it flutters back and forth.

In my basic training at the Naval Academy, there was a footbridge with two telephone poles supporting the center span leading to some athletic fields. The resonant frequency was roughly the same as the double-time marching (running) pace. We had been instructed not to march in step across the bridge, but one instructor forgot, marched his squad across, and snapped one of the telephone poles. After that, they replaced the center span with steel, which being much more rigid, has a much higher resonant frequency.

edit: http://www.enm.bris.ac.uk/research/nonlinear/tacoma/tacoma.html is a good site with info, photos, and videos of the Tacoma Narrows bridge failure.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
More recent examinations have shown that it is a lot more complicated than simply saying "resonance"! I don't have it with me now but if I remember tomorrow I will post a link to a discussion.
 
I would like to see those new explanations, Halls. I thought the oscillation due to resonance was more than enough to cause a collapse of the Bridge's deck.
 
I'm not certain, but I think the added complexity was due to the aerodynamic forces and the fact that the motion was torsional. The situation I described is more typical of resonance: simple harmonic motion in the axis where the bridge is loaded (vertical), with a driving force that is periodic, but always the same and far too small to cause failure if it were constant.
 
I don't have web-site references but

Differential Equations by Blanchard, Devaney, and Hall has a long discussion of the Tacoma Narrows bridge and refers to
"Large-amplitude Periodic Oscillations in Suspension Bridges: Some New Connections with Non-linear Analysis" by Lazer and McKenna, SIAM review, vol. 32, no. 4, 1990, pp. 537- 578.
 
thanks to everyone for helping me understand!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
8K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K