Abstract IABSE Task Group 3.1 has the mandate to define reference results for the validation of methodologies and programs used to study both stability and buffeting responses of long-span bridges. These tools for the simulation of the aeroelastic behaviour are fundamental in the safe design of bridges and they should be validated. The working group decided to set up a benchmark procedure consisting of several steps to define reference results for this validation. For each step, contributors use their own methodology to simulate the bridge behaviour using the same input data. All the results are then compared, and reference values are defined through statistical analysis. The benchmark procedure is considered as a three-step problem with substeps of increasing difficulty: Step 1 compares numerical results only, Step 2 is validation against wind tunnel experiments, and Step 3 is validation against full-scale data. In this paper, the contributions and the reference results of the simplest initial substep (1.1a) are presented. It consists of the simulation of the aeroelastic response of a two-degree-of-freedom bridge deck section, with analytical aerodynamic coefficients, forced by turbulent wind. Despite the problem’s simplicity, differences in some contributions are significant, confirming the necessity of having solid references to validate software programs.

中文翻译：

---

IABSE 任务组 3.1 基准测试结果。第 1 部分：基于解析空气动力学的二自由度桥面截面数值分析

摘要 IABSE 任务组 3.1 的任务是定义用于研究大跨度桥梁稳定性和抖振响应的方法和程序验证的参考结果。这些用于模拟气动弹性行为的工具是桥梁安全设计的基础，应该对其进行验证。工作组决定建立一个由几个步骤组成的基准程序来定义此验证的参考结果。对于每一步，贡献者使用他们自己的方法来模拟使用相同输入数据的桥梁行为。然后比较所有结果，并通过统计分析定义参考值。基准程序被认为是一个三步问题，具有越来越难的子步骤：步骤 1 仅比较数值结果，步骤 2 是针对风洞实验的验证，步骤 3 是针对全尺寸数据的验证。在本文中，介绍了最简单的初始子步骤（1.1a）的贡献和参考结果。它包括对二自由度桥面板截面的气动弹性响应的模拟，以及由湍流风强迫的分析空气动力学系数。尽管问题很简单，但某些贡献的差异还是很大的，这证实了拥有可靠的参考来验证软件程序的必要性。具有解析空气动力学系数，受湍流风的影响。尽管问题很简单，但某些贡献的差异还是很大的，这证实了拥有可靠参考来验证软件程序的必要性。具有解析空气动力学系数，受湍流风的影响。尽管问题很简单，但某些贡献的差异还是很大的，这证实了拥有可靠的参考来验证软件程序的必要性。