Rhythmic crowd bobbing on a grandstand simulator

• Published in: Journal of sound and vibration Vol. 332; no. 2; pp. 442 - 454
• Main Authors: Comer, A.J., Blakeborough, A., Williams, M.S.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Kidlington Elsevier Ltd 21.01.2013; Elsevier
• Subjects: Dynamic loads; Dynamical systems; Dynamics; Exact sciences and technology; Fundamental areas of phenomenology (including applications); Grandstands; Harmonics; Physics; Simulation; Solid mechanics; Spools; Structural and continuum mechanics; Vibration; Vibration, mechanical wave, dynamic stability (aeroelasticity, vibration control...); Vibration; Coordination; Crowd; Collective process; Vibration test; Cantilever; Experimental study; Stadia; Energy supply; Uncertain system; Harmonic generator; Annoyance; Comfort; Rebound; Energy absorption; Structural analysis; Dynamic load
• ISSN: 0022-460X; 1095-8568
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jsv.2012.08.012

It is widely accepted that concerted human activity such as bouncing or bobbing can excite cantilever grandstands. Crowd coordination can be unwitting and may be exacerbated by structural motion caused by resonant structural response. This is an area of uncertainty in the design and analysis of modern grandstands. This paper presents experimental measurement and analysis of rhythmic crowd bobbing loads obtained from tests on a grandstand simulator with two distinct support conditions; (a) rigid, and; (b) flexible. It was found that significant structural vibration at the bobbing frequency did not increase the effective bobbing load. Structural motion at the bobbing frequency caused a reduction in the dynamic load factor (DLF) at the frequency of the second harmonic while those at the first and third harmonics were unaffected. Two plausible reasons for this are: (a) the bobbing group were unable to supply significant energy to the system at the frequency of the second harmonic; (b) the bobbing group altered their bobbing style to reduce the response of the grandstand simulator. It was deduced that the bobbing group did not absorb energy from the dynamic system. Furthermore, dynamic load factors for groups of test subjects bobbing on a rigid structure were typically greater than those of synthesised groups derived from individuals bobbing alone, possibly due to group effects such as audio and visual stimuli from neighbouring test subjects. Last, the vibration levels experienced by the test subjects appear to be below levels likely to cause discomfort. This is to be expected as the test subjects were themselves controlling the magnitude and duration of vibration for the bobbing tests considered.