Search for: All records

Abstract Recent major investments in infrastructure in the United States and globally present a crucial opportunity to embed equity within the heart of resilient infrastructure decision-making. Yet there is a notable absence of frameworks within the engineering and scientific fields for integrating equity into planning, design, and maintenance of infrastructure. Additionally, whole-of-government approaches to infrastructure, including the Justice40 Initiative, mimic elements of process management that support exploitative rather than exploratory innovation. These and other policies risk creating innovation traps that limit analytical and engineering advances necessary to prioritize equity in decision-making, identification and disruption of mechanisms that cause or contribute to inequities, and remediation of historic harms. Here, we propose a three-tiered framework toward equitable and resilient infrastructure through restorative justice, incremental policy innovation, and exploratory research innovation. This framework aims to ensure equitable access and benefits of infrastructure, minimize risk disparities, and embrace restorative justice to repair historical and systemic inequities. We outline incremental policy innovation and exploratory research action items to address and mitigate risk disparities, emphasizing the need for community-engaged research and the development of equity metrics. Among other action items, we recommend a certification system—referred to as Social, Environmental, and Economic Development (SEED)—to train infrastructure engineers and planners and ensure attentiveness to gaps that exist within and dynamically interact across each tier of the proposed framework. Through the framework and proposed actions, we advocate for a transformative vision for equitable infrastructure that emphasizes the interconnectedness of social, environmental, and technical dimensions in infrastructure planning, design, and maintenance. 

In the study, a series of wind tunnel tests were conducted to investigate wind effects acting on dome structures (1/60 scale) induced by straight-line winds at a Reynolds number in the order of 106. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations were performed as well, including a Large Eddy Simulation (LES) and Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) simulation, and their performances were validated by a comparison with the wind tunnel testing data. It is concluded that wind loads generally increase with upstream wind velocities, and they are reduced over suburban terrain due to ground friction. The maximum positive pressure normally occurs near the base of the dome on the windward side caused by the stagnation area and divergence of streamlines. The minimum suction pressure occurs at the apex of the dome because of the blockage of the dome and convergence of streamlines. Suction force is the most significant among all wind loads, and special attention should be paid to the roof design for proper wind resistance. Numerical simulations also indicate that LES results match better with the wind tunnel testing in terms of the distribution pattern of the mean pressure coefficient on the dome surface and total suction force. The mean and root-mean-square errors of the meridian pressure coefficient associated with the LES are about 60% less than those associated with RANS results, and the error of suction force is about 40–70% less. Moreover, the LES is more accurate in predicting the location of boundary layer separation and reproducing the complex flow field behind the dome, and is superior in simulating vortex structures around the dome to further understand the unsteadiness and dynamics in the flow field.