KARMAN VORTEX SHEDDING AND THE STROUHAL NUMBER
Revision A
By Tom Irvine
Email: tomirvine@[Link]
April 7, 2009
Variables
D
diameter
fs
Strouhal frequency
Re
Reynolds number
Strouhal number
Free stream velocity
Kinematic viscosity
Introduction
Wind has a number of effects upon structures.
For example, a steady wind exerts a quasi-static drag force upon a structure. This effect
is readily apparent as trees are bent backward by the oncoming wind pressure.
Wind may also exert a lift force and moment upon a structure, contributing to a selfexcited oscillation of the structure. The original Tacoma Narrows Bridge, which had an
aerodynamic instability, failed due to self-excited oscillation.
Furthermore, the wind's lift force may generate vortices in the wake behind the structure.
Under certain conditions, the vortices may be periodic, forming a "Karman vortex street."
This effect is shown in Figure 1 as taken from Reference 1.
Figure 1. Vortex Shedding around a Spherical Body
This report is concerned with Karman vortex shedding. The specific purpose is to discuss
the "Strouhal number" which relates the frequency of Karman vortex shedding to a
characteristic dimension of the body and the wind speed.
Circular Cylinder
Two key parameters for analyzing vortex shedding are the Reynolds number and the
Strouhal number. An empirical relationship between these numbers for a circular section
is given in Table 1.
Table 1.
Strouhal Number vs. Reynolds Number
for a Circular Section (Reference 2)
Reynolds Number
Strouhal
Re
Number S
< 30
0
50
0.13
500
0.20
1000
0.21
0.20
104
0.19
105
0.21
106
0.23
107
Note that the Reynolds number Re is defined as
Re = UD/
Air has the following kinematic viscosity under normal conditions per Reference 3.
1.6 (10-4) ft2/sec
The flow regimes across a circular cylinder for various Reynolds numbers are shown in
Table 2, taken from Reference 4.
The Strouhal number S is defined as
S = fsD/U
(2)
where fs is the frequency of full cycles of vortex shedding in Hertz.
The fs value shall be called the "Strouhal frequency" rather than the "vortex shedding
frequency" in this report because periodic vortex shedding does not occur for all flow
regimes, as is apparent in Table 2.
Note that the Strouhal frequency is also referred to as the "lift oscillation frequency" by
some sources.
The Strouhal frequency is thus
fs = S U/D
(3)
Examples of Circular Cylinders
Bishop notes in Reference 5 that electrical transmission lines and tall steel chimneys may
oscillate due to vortex shedding. He gives three methods for designing or modifying
chimneys to solve this problem:
1. Guy wires
2. Fire-brick lining
3. Helical spoilers or strakes
Bishop further notes that vortex shedding may also occur in water. For example, the
periscope of a moving submarine may oscillate thus yielding a blurred image.
Table 2. Regimes of Fluid Flow across Circular Cylinders
Regime of
unseparated flow
Re < 5
A fixed pair of
vortices in wake
5 < Re < 40
40 < Re < 90
Vortex street is
laminar
90 < Re < 150
Vortex street is
laminar
Transition range to
turbulence in
vortex
150 <Re < 300
Vortex street is
fully turbulent
300 < Re < 3(10 )
3(10 ) < Re < 3.5(10 )
3.5(10 ) < Re
Laminar boundary
layer has undergone
turbulent transition
and wake is
narrower and
disorganized
Reestablishment of
turbulent vortex
street
Rectangular Section
The Strouhal number for a non-circular section is still given by equation (2), except that
D represents a characteristic dimension rather than the diameter. The Strouhal number
for a rectangular section is shown in Figure 2, taken from Reference 6.
STROUHAL NUMBERS FOR RECTANGULAR SECTIONS
0.20
STROUHAL NUMBER S
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
ASPECT RATIO a/d
U
d
Figure 2.
a
Tacoma Narrows Bridge
The original Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapsed in 1940. It experienced severe torsional
oscillations driven by a 42 mile per hour wind.
The fundamental weakness of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge was its extreme flexibility,
both vertically and in torsion.
This weakness was due to the shallowness of the
stiffening girders and the narrowness of the roadway, relative to its span length.
Engineers still debate the exact cause of its collapse, however. Three theories are:
1. Random turbulence
2. Periodic vortex shedding
3. Aerodynamic instability (negative damping)
A cross-section of the bridge is shown in Figure 3.
39 ft
8 ft
Figure 3. Cross-section of Tacoma Narrows Bridge Span
The Strouhal number for the bridge cross-section is S = 0.11 according to Reference 7.
Furthermore, the characteristic dimension is the girder height 8 ft. The Strouhal
frequency for a 42 mph (61.6 ft/sec) wind is thus
fs = (0.11) (61.1 ft/sec) / ( 8 ft)
(4)
fs = 0.84 Hz
(5)
The Strouhal frequency is rounded to 1 Hz in Reference 7. On the other hand, the
bridge's torsional oscillation was observed to be 0.2 Hz. The Strouhal frequency was thus
at least two octaves greater than the torsional mode frequency.
Billah and Scanlan thus argue strongly in Reference 7 that the Karman vortex shedding
could not have driven the torsional mode oscillation. They argue instead that an
aerodynamic instability resulted in a self-excited oscillation, which caused the failure.
Nearly seventy years after the failure, the matter is not completely settled.
Nevertheless, Bishop writes in Reference 5 that vortex shedding was part of the selfexcited oscillation.
Billah and Scanlan concede in Reference 7 that a flutter-like, natural vortex shedding
may have accompanied the self-excited oscillation, but they argue that this vortex
shedding differed from the Karman vortex street as shown in Figure 1.
Conclusion
Vortex shedding exerts an alternating lift force on the structure.
perpendicular to the wind flow.
The force is
Periodic vortex shedding is a concern because the Strouhal frequency could occur at, or
near, a natural frequency of the structure. If so, the structure would undergo resonant
vibration. It could thus experience a failure due to either yielding or fatigue.
As an aside, an alternate relationship between the Strouhal and Reynolds number for a
circular cross-section is given in Appendix A.
References
1. James Koughan, "The Collapse of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, Evaluation of
Competing Theories of its Demise, and the Effects of the Disaster of Succeeding
Bridge Designs," The University of Texas at Austin, 1996.
2. R. Blevins, Fluid Dynamics Handbook, Van Norstrand Reinhold, New York, 1984.
3. I. Shames, Mechanics of Fluids, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1982.
4. C. Harris, editor; Shock and Vibration Handbook, 3rd edition; A. Davenport and M.
Novak, "Chapter 29 Part II: Structures Induced by Wind," McGraw-Hill, New York,
1988.
5. R. Bishop, Vibration, Cambridge University Press, London, 1979.
6. H. Bachmann, et al., Vibration Problems in Structures, Birkhauser Verlag, Berlin,
1995.
7. K. Billah and R. Scanlan, "Resonance, Tacoma Narrows Bridge Failure, and
Undergraduate Physics, Textbooks;" American Journal of Physics, 1991.
8. Transmission Line Reference Book, Wind-Induced Conductor Motion, Electric Power
Research Institute, Palo Alto, California, 1979.
APPENDIX A
STROUHAL NUMBER vs. REYNOLDS NUMBER FOR A CYLINDER
Polished Cylinder
Rough Cylinder
0.26
STROUHAL NUMBER (S)
0.24
0.22
0.20
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.10
50
10
10
10
REYNOLD NUMBER (R)
Figure A-1.
The curves are taken from Reference 8.
10
