# Buffeting Response Prediction of Long-Span Bridges Based on Different Wind Tunnel Test Techniques
## 1 Introduction
This makes the prediction results biased by the traditional calculation method based on the rigid sectional model pressure or force measurement test to identify aerodynamic admittance on account of the ignorance of the vibration of the structure. Fortunately, the vibration test can effectively avoid the limitations of force and pressure tests. At the same time, it can truly reflect the structural motion state, and comprehensively consider the effects of self-excited force terms such as aerodynamic damping and aerodynamic stiffness. Recently, [PERSON] et al. [26] proposed the concept of the integrated transfer function based on the research of [PERSON] et al. [27; 28; 29] on the influence of the structural aspect ratio on the three-dimensional effect of turbulence, and gave a long-span bridge buffeting response prediction method based on the integrated transfer function. The method points out that the aspect ratio of the test model will have a significant impact on the prediction accuracy of the buffeting response, and can correct the deviation of the prediction result of the buffeting response caused by the inaccurate simulation of the wind field parameters in the wind tunnel. However, even though [PERSON] et al. [26] proved the feasibility of the integrated transfer function in the prediction of the buffeting response of long-span bridges through rigorous theoretical derivation and verified the independence of the integrated transfer function from the wind field characteristics through full-bridge aeroelastic model wind tunnel tests, they only expected the results to provide ideas for the buffeting response prediction of long-span bridges based on the identification of integrated transfer functions, and the accuracy and effectiveness of the method have not been directly verified by sectional model vibration tests. In addition, they considered that the sectional model test would also eliminate the additional aerodynamic interference of the structural ancillary facilities. At the same time, compared with the full-bridge test, the taut strip model test has the characteristics of low cost and short duration, and can also consider the three-dimensional vibration of the structure. The taut strip model has been selected to replace the full-bridge aeroelastic model to perform the buffeting response test, and the results are compared with the prediction results based on the sectional model test in this paper. For this reason, the paper uses a long-span bridge with a basic section as an example, takes the turbulent characteristics simulated in the taut strip model test as the target wind field, and relies on three different test techniques to predict the buffeting response of the structure. These techniques are as follows:  
1. Identifying the aerodynamic parameters, such as aerodynamic admittance, through sectional model force measurement tests, and then calculating the response according to the traditional buffeting response calculation method;  
2. Identifying the integrated transfer function of the structure through the sectional model vibration test, then predicting the buffeting response by using the method proposed by [PERSON] et al. [26];  
3. Measuring the buffeting response of the structure through the taut strip model test. Each buffeting response prediction result was then compared to investigate the long-span bridge buffeting response prediction methods based on the above three different test techniques and verify the accuracy and effectiveness of the prediction method based on the sectional model vibration test to identify the integrated transfer function.