Review synthesizes galloping hazards and mitigation in overhead transmission conductors and railway systems, highlighting different responses and constraints.
Icing-induced galloping is a low-frequency, large-amplitude aeroelastic instability that threatens both overhead transmission conductors and railway overhead contact systems (OCSs). Although these flexible cable systems share a common wind–ice–structure energy-transfer basis, their system-level responses, operational consequences, and engineering constraints differ substantially. This review synthesizes recent progress in galloping hazards, excitation mechanisms, aerodynamic characterization, dynamic response analysis, experimental investigations, field observations, and mitigation technologies for both infrastructure systems. For transmission conductors, relatively mature research frameworks have been developed around sectional aerodynamic instability, vertical–torsional coupling, bundled-conductor wake interference, spacer constraints, geometric nonlinearity, and tower–line coupling. In contrast, OCS galloping remains less fully understood because contact-wire sectional details, tension-only dropper behavior, discrete registration constraints, pantograph–catenary interaction, and current-collection requirements must be considered jointly. Existing mitigation strategies mainly focus on pre-event risk reduction through aerodynamic modification, structural-parameter adjustment, constraint control, damping enhancement, ice management, and operational measures, whereas rapid suppression after galloping onset remains insufficiently developed. The comparison indicates that assessment methods and mitigation devices cannot be transferred directly between transmission lines and OCSs on the basis of sectional aerodynamic similarity alone. Future research should emphasize long-term natural-icing monitoring, validated three-dimensional unsteady aerodynamic models, coupled wind–ice–structure simulations, system-specific field validation, data-driven early warning, and rapid-response control strategies to improve the resilience of power and railway infrastructure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: