cy (cychan) wrote,

Where "self-excitation" is not as dirty as it sounds

For more than (most of) you'd ever want to know [pdf] about the physics behind the 1940 Tacoma Narrows bridge incident. My professor was wrong (and apparently so were a bunch of physics textbooks): the culprit was not wind-induced forced resonance, but in fact: flutter. Thanks Wikipedia!

From the abstract:
It is ... demonstrated that the ultimate failure of the bridge was in fact related to an aerodynamically induced condition of self-excitation or ``negative damping'' in a torsional degree of freedom. The aeroelastic phenomenon involved was an interactive one in which developed wind forces were strongly linked to structural motion. This paper emphasizes the fact that, physically as well as mathematically, forced resonance and self-excitation are fundamentally different phenomena.

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded