Professional Documents
Culture Documents
C:
Page I
STRUCTURAL BEHAVIOR OF LONG SPAN PRESTRESSED CONCRETE CABLESTAYED BRIDGE WITH UNEQUAL HEIGHT OF PYLONS
Grade: 2009 Candidate: Didier D. BOKO-HAYA Academic Degree Applied for: Master Degree Speciality: Bridge & Tunnel Engineering Supervisor: Prof. Li Yadong
May, 2013
Page II
The core purpose of this thesis was to investigate the structural behavior of the Second Fuling Wujiang River Bridge, which is a long-span prestressed concrete (PC) cable-stayed bridge (CSB) in China with unequal height of pylons. In this thesis, an improved approach for the structural behaviour of long-span prestressed concrete cable-stayed bridge with unequal height of pylons was proposed using full finite element analysis (FEA) model of the bridge. Works carried out in this research considered background knowledge and structural behavior (such as displacement, stress, stability and natural vibration factor) during construction and operation stages of the project. Finally dynamic analysis on the seismic effect and wind stability resistance was carried out. The results showed that: each member of the superstructure possesses greater safety factors, which means the design had met the requirements.
Page III
Abstract
With the growth, complexity and size in traffic flow throughout the world in the past years, use of modern Prestressed Concrete (PC) technique emanated in the field of bridge engineering. This kind of technique was a solution for the need to control structural behavior on elements in bridges. Hence, over a period of time, bridge engineers generated a large pattern for utilization. And as a result of this development in the use of the technique today, most bridge structures are built and have become popular worldwide. However, the cable-stayed bridge (CBS) with unequal height of pylons is rare. Some of the salient information about this type of bridge included: structural behavior and design parameters, and good design in terms of ability to accurately foretell the field response of the final structure to all types of loading. As competition in the cables-stayed bridge was approaching its stiffest levels, insight into the information derived from these researches provided better services while gaining a competitive edge in terms of economy, aesthetics, bridge superior appearance, bridge safety, quick, efficient construction and long-span capabilities. However, the magnitude of this field has recently become so immense that analysis manual is not feasible any more. Therefore, more perplexed analysis was essential to get such detail from the structural behavior. These techniques have been proved to perform very important tasks such as static, stability and dynamic behavior. Engineers, probably the most important of all the above tasks, can be simply writing up as a process of bridge guideline. Some few works has been done with the aim of generating recommendations to this kind of bridge which can help bridge engineers to take some decisions based on the new detail mined from the large amount of data for CSB with unequal height of pylons building up. The cable-stayed bridge with unequal height of pylons rules requires that the bridge engineers have to define important parameters which should be the minimum document and confidence. But this is so hard to set when no background information concerning the dataset is clearly known. This research primarily investigated the potential of the Second Fuling Wujiang River Bridge, cable-stayed bridge with unequal height of pylons approach in improving its performance. A detailed study of the structural behavior of the asymmetric long-span Prestressed Concrete Cable-Stayed Bridge using unequal height of pylons was proposed. An improved approach was also proposed. Based on the Chongqing Second
Page IV
Fuling Wujiang River Bridge, an asymmetric cable-stayed bridge with unequal height of pylons was simulated by using FEM programs MIDAS/Civil software. To accomplish these tasks, the bridge structural behaviour on both, construction and operation phase such as displacement, stress, stability and natural vibration factor has been analyzed. The following results were obtained: the girder static performance, investigated by FEM models the cables and pylons. Furthermore, the girder under construction was analyzed. Finally, dynamic analysis was carried out on the seismic effect and stability resistance of the bridge. These results showed that the bridge structural behaviour satisfied the requirement of the related design codes and proved to be reliable. These results can later be interpreted or labeled according to the cable-stayed bridge specific requirements.
Key words: Structural behavior; cable-stayed bridge; Finite Element Method, asymmetric; unequal height of pylons.
Page V
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract ...................................................................................................................... III TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................ V LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................. VII LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................... IX LIST OF NOTATIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................... X 1. NOTATIONS .................................................................................................... X 1.1 ROMAN UPPER CASE LATERS .......................................................... X 1.2 Roman lower case letters......................................................................... XI 1.3 Greek lower case letters ......................................................................... XII ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................... XII
2.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................... XIII CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................ 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 DEVELOPMENT AND CHARACTERISTICS................................................ 1 HISTORICAL EVOLUTION ............................................................................ 5 ENGINEERING BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE ............................. 7 1.3.1 Engineering background ........................................................................... 7 1.3.2 Significance of the research .................................................................... 11 OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................... 12 SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY .................................................................... 13 THESIS OUTLINE .......................................................................................... 14 BASIC PRINCIPLES AND IDEAS OF THE FE ANALYSIS ....................... 15 2.1.1 Static analysis .......................................................................................... 17 2.1.2 Dynamic analysis .................................................................................... 17 2.1.3 Stability analysis ..................................................................................... 18 CONSTRUCTION METHODS ....................................................................... 20 THE STRUCTURE FINITE ELEMENT MODEL.......................................... 23 3.1.1 Computational model .............................................................................. 23 3.1.2 Calculation parameters ............................................................................ 26 CONSTRUCTION PROCESS ANALYSIS ..................................................... 35 3.2.1 Construction stages definition ................................................................. 35 3.2.2 The maximum double cantilever stage.................................................... 39 3.2.3 Stress and displacement analysis in construction .................................... 40 3.2.4 Cable force on construction and finished dead state ............................... 42 COMPLETED STATE ANALYSIS ................................................................ 43 3.3.1 Analysis of distributed load effects ......................................................... 43
2.2 3.1
3.2
3.3
Page VI
3.3.2 Effect analysis of load combination ........................................................ 49 3.3.3 Limited state analysis .............................................................................. 52 3.4 3.5 4.1 BRIDGE STABILITY ANALYSIS ................................................................ 55 3.4.1 Bridge stability analysis .......................................................................... 56 SUMMARY...................................................................................................... 59 STRUCTURE DYNAMIC ANALYSIS THEORY OVERVIEW .................... 60 4.1.1 FE method for solving natural vibration frequencies and mode shapes . 63 4.1.2 Dynamic analysis of the earthquake........................................................ 64 4.1.3 Vibration characteristics analysis results. ............................................... 65 SEISMIC PERFORMANCE ............................................................................ 68 SUMMARY...................................................................................................... 74 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................. 75 FUTURE WORK.............................................................................................. 76
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 77
Page VII
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 View of different styles of cable-stayed bridges with different heights of pylons................. 6 Figure 1.2 General layout of Fuling River Bridge over Wujiang River (Units: cm)............................... 9 Figure 1.3 Arrangement plan of the main tower section (Units: cm) ...................................................... 9 Figure 1.4 Arrangement plan of deck section (Units: cm) ...................................................................... 9 Figure 3.1 Overall linkage model ......................................................................................................... 25 Figure 3.2 Elastic link ........................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 3.3 Pier and Girder .................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 3.4 Full bridge cross section (transversal) ................................................................................. 26 Figure 3.5 Configuration of both towers elevation with its cross sections ........................................... 27 Figure 3.6 Configuration of cables (106 cables from higher to lower tower) ....................................... 28 Figure 3.7 Main beam prestressed steel beam layout............................................................................ 29 Figure 3.8 Stress of the girder and tower upper edge............................................................................ 39 Figure 3.9 Stress of the girder and tower lower edge............................................................................ 39 Figure 3.10 Stress of the cables ............................................................................................................ 40 Figure 3.11 Displacement of towers top at different construction stages ............................................. 40 Figure 3.12 Stresses in Seg.No.0 of girder at different construction stages .......................................... 41 Figure 3.13 Stresses of both towers bottom section at different construction stages ............................ 41 Figure 3.14 Stresses at the upper flange of tower and girder on dead load at completed stage ............ 44 Figure 3.15 Stresses at the lower edge of tower and girder on dead load at completed stage ............... 44 Figure 3.16 Stressed in all cables on dead load at completed stage ...................................................... 44 Figure 3.17 Structure displacement on dead load at completed stage (unit: cm) .................................. 44 Figure 3.18 Stresses at the upper flange of tower and girder on live load at completed stage .............. 46 Figure 3.19 Stresses at upper flange of tower and girder on dead and live load at completed stage .... 46 Figure 3.20 Stress amplitude on live load at completed stage .............................................................. 46 Figure 3.21 Maximum displacement under vehicle load -City A ......................................................... 47 Figure 3.22 Minimum displacement under vehicle load -City A .......................................................... 47 Figure 3.23 Displacement under pedestrian load .................................................................................. 47 Figure 3.24 Action of the main beam displacement under live load (Pedestrian+ City A) ................... 48 Figure 3.25 Stress envelope in the structure upper edge under ultimate limit state .............................. 53 Figure 3.26 Stress envelope in the structure lower edge under ultimate limit state .............................. 53 Figure 3.27 Stress of all cables under ultimate limit state..................................................................... 53 Figure 3.28 Displacement of all structure under ultimate limit state .................................................... 53 Figure 3.29 Stress envelope in the structure upper edge under serviceability limit state ...................... 54 Figure 3.30 Stress envelope in the structure lower edge under serviceability limit state ...................... 54 Figure 3.31 Stress of all cables under serviceability limit state ............................................................ 55 Figure 3.32 Displacement of all structure under serviceability limit state ............................................ 55 Figure 3.33 Configuration of first five buckling mode ......................................................................... 57 Figure 3.34 Configuration of the first five instability modes diagram .................................................. 59
Page VIII
Figure 4.1 Free vibration mode shapes ................................................................................................. 67 Figure 4.2 Seismic wave ....................................................................................................................... 69 Figure 4.3 Stress of the bridge upper edge under load combination I ................................................... 71 Figure 4.4 Stress of the bridge lower edge under load combination I ................................................... 71 Figure 4.5 Stress of the bridge upper edge under load combination II ................................................. 72 Figure 4.6 Stress of the bridge lower edge under load combination II ................................................. 72 Figure 4.7 Stress of the bridge upper edge under load combination III ................................................ 72 Figure 4.8 Stress of the bridge lower edge under load combination III ................................................ 73 Figure 4.9 Stress envelop on upper edge of the bridge ......................................................................... 73 Figure 4.10 Stress envelop on lower edge of the bridge ....................................................................... 73
Page IX
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1 Selected Cable-Stayed Bridges with different heights of pylons ............................................ 7 Table 1.2 Input-output ............................................................................................................................ 8 Table 1.3 Main Geometric Data of Fuling Wujiang River Bridge ........................................................ 10 Table 2.1 Different staging construction ............................................................................................... 21 Table 3.1 Number of nodes and different elements .............................................................................. 24 Table 3.2 Cable parameter .................................................................................................................... 29 Table 3.3 Material parameters .............................................................................................................. 30 Table 3.4 Summarizes the material properties for the cables................................................................ 32 Table 3.5 Load parameters .................................................................................................................... 33 Table 3.6 Construction stages/phases definitions ................................................................................. 36 Table 3.7 Construction and finished cable force ................................................................................... 42 Table 3.8 Cable forces and stresses on dead load at completed stage with creep and shrinkage of 10 years concrete.................................................................................................................. 45 Table 3.9 Most unfavorable stress in control section under all kinds of loads (unit: MPa) .................. 48 Table 3.10 Load combination ............................................................................................................... 49 Table 3.11 Most unfavorable stress in control section under the load combination above (unit: MPa)..................................................................................................................................... 50 Table 3.12 Five first-order condition stable coefficient results............................................................. 56 Table 3.13 Five first-order condition Instability modes coefficient results .......................................... 58 Table 4.1 Vibration characteristic value table at the completion state .................................................. 66 Table 4.2 First 50 order cycles and effective converted vibration mass ratio ....................................... 69
Page X
Force
[N]
Moment The structure of the overall elastic stiffness matrix; Overall geometric stiffness matrix structure; Geometric nonlinearity elastic stiffness of the overall structure matrix; External load increment Tangent stiffness matrix Shear modulus Equivalent elastic modulus of the inclined cables
2 Area m
KD
KG
KDL F KT
G
Eeq
A D F I L T K
[N] [ m] [ s]
2 Moment of Inertia mm
Length
Period time
3 Stiffness matrix EI / L
C
P L DL LL IL Kh Kv
Damping matrix Mass matrix External force (dynamic loads) vector Load Dead Load Live Load (include vehicle load and pedestrian load) Imposed Load Horizontal seismic coefficient Vertical seismic coefficient or damping coefficient
Page XI
[ kN .m]
con
f pk
lc
[ m]
x x
Velocities Accelerations Element displacement Mass Density Natural frequency Hz [ ] Acceleration vector
2 m / s
u, v
c v f
Page XII
[ rad / s] [ Hz ]
2. ABBREVIATIONS
FEM FEA RC DC PC DOF Max Min Seg. No. BC CS ACAF IF LTAF PTH8/9/10' CA H7' SWJTU SLS ULS M I STI PTDCG TIGR TIOST STD NTDCG TDGR ACS LT HT
Finite Element Method Finite Element Analysis Reinforced Concrete Diameter of cables Prestressed Concrete Degrees of freedom Maximum Minimum Segment Number Boundaries conditions Construction Stage All Cable Adjusted Force Initial Force Lower Tower Adjusted force Patch Tendon H8/9/10 Cable Adjusted H7' South West Jiaotong University Serviceability Limit State Ultimate Limit State Mass per unit length Moment of Inertia System Temperature Increase Positive Temperature Difference between Cable and Girder Temperature Increase in Girder Roof Temperature Increase in One Side of a Tower System Temperature Decrease Negative Temperature Difference between Cable and Girder Temperature Decrease in Girder Roof Adjust Cable stage 2 Lower Tower Higher Tower
Page XIII
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, my due thanks go to the Almighty God for all his love, protection and guidance that has been with me up to the present time. I would like to thank my advisor, mentor, Professor LI YADONG, the heads, Department of Bridge Engineering in SWJTU for seeing me through this long journey. Most importantly, his kind of instruction in research ways, academic rigor, patience and guidance at critical points are invaluable and worth emulating. Without his support, guidance and vision this project would have not been made possible. Despite his busy agenda, Prof. LI has always made time to read through, edit and discuss over my project ideas. Apart from his strange technical skills, and his deep knowledge of the professional area, he provided me with very useful experience and views related to various aspects of professional life that have contributed greatly to the successful of my work. I will forever be indebted to him for his generosity, for having faith in my abilities and for helping me make this significant work experience highly agreeable. I would also like to thank his family, especially his wife Xu Huifen Laoshi for all her excellent mother role, for their friendship and support through the years. I would also like to thank the following people for their support in this endeavor: Dr. YAO Changrong, other advisor, and mentor, who has been a role model to me during this dissertation. Prof. LI YONGLE, other mentor who has also been a role model to me. Dr. Zhang XUN, Dr ZHOU, Mr. GU Ying and WANG Hupeng thank for your help and friendship. Mr. Zhang Qin, brother and best friend, role model, Zhang Qin has helped me out more than a few times, and his ability is unmatched. I would like to extend my appreciation to my colleagues, with whom I share the supervision of Prof. LI, for being dependable reference points when testing my ideas. Besides, I am grateful to their classmates who helped me. It was very appreciable to have such kind of friends. Also, my special thanks go to Beninese as well as to Chinese Governments for kindly granting me the esteemed scholarship for this thesis. In this regard, I
Southwest Jiaotong University Master Degree Thesis along with us every times.
Page XIV
sincerely thank all the officers and staff of the Foreign Affairs Office who have been I especially want to extand word of thanks to Prof. AWANOU C. Norbert, Prof. B. KOUNOUEWA and Prof. A. AKPO, whos the first one, is the head Director and the others the LPR technical staff. You have been very kind to us, going above and beyond your duties to help us and many other students else. The University (UAC) is very lucky to have you. G. KOTO NGOBI and O. MAMADOU, thank to both of you for your friendship. To my brother Koffi TOGBENOU, we have shared many experiences all the time. My sincere thanks also go to all these professors I have had in class for being accommodating and patient for my difficult time. As you know, words cannot express my all feeling and most sincere gratitude to my wonderful parents, my sisters, brothers, friends and relatives for them moral support. Without their love, endless support, and understanding, this would have not been possible. They are the main reasons I have been able to reach this point. This project is dedicated to all of them whose has been an integral part of my success.
Didier D. BOKO-HAYA
CHINA, May 2013
Page 1
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 DEVELOPMENT AND CHARACTERISTICS
The first cable-stayed bridges in modern times were developed by European bridge engineers. It was founded in the 17 th and 18th century respectively by Faustus Verantius (1617) and Immanuel Lscher (1784). As steel was not yet identified back then, strings and wood were used instead of cables [1-2]. In 1823, the famous French Engineer and scientist Claude Navier published the results of a study on bridges with the deck stiffened by wrought iron chains taking both, fan/harp shaped system, into consideration. Suspension combining system idea with stays to achieve more efficient structural systems had not been completely forgotten after the days of Brooklyn Bridge, New York, USA in 1883. Thereby, in 1938 Dischinger proposed a system in which the central part of the span was carried by a suspension system whereas the outer parts were carried by stays radiating from the pylon top. It was suggested for a cable supported bridge with a main span of 750 m long to be built across the Elbe River in Hamburg. After World War II (1939-1945), German engineers pioneered the design of cablestayed bridges to obtain optimum structural performance from material like steel which was in short supply. To improve the highway transportation system, innovation and inexpensive bridge design challenge were founded by German engineers to change most of the Rhine and Elbe river crossings which were destroyed during World War II. But many of these early bridges collapsed because the numeric calculation methods were rather sketchy. Disappeared for over a century, it reappeared in the mid-1950s and exceeded almost all competing systems so far in both bridges in rail and road. Engineers then begin a new era and large extent has been obtain much longer in recent years for CSB due to the progressed technique of structural analysis tools permitting calculation of bridge cable forces throughout the erection period and thereby assuring the efficiency of entire cables in the structure. Such kind of calculations was firstly made in connection with the erection of the Stroemsund Bridge. Freyssinet (18791962) is a great pioneer for concrete bridges built and designed with the creation of prestress [8]. The goal of using prestress was the complete elimination of tensile stresses in the concrete and under the action of service loads. Also the elimination of possible deformations, cracks, and the increase of load capacity gained from the use of high-strength reinforcement.
Page 2
Stroemsund Bridge in Sweden (1955) was the first modern CSB designed and built in Europe by Dischinger. Since then, many cable-stayed structures with both concrete and steel bridge decks have been constructed [6, 25, 28, 30, 32,42]. The use of PC technology until now, has greatly participated in many structures development. CSB structure reappeared and bridge designers have focused more in its dynamic performance. Therefore with the span enlargement of the bridge type structure, attention was given to its seismic stability, wind resistant and vibration [10, 11, 30]. The Theodor H. Bridge across the Rhine was opened to traffic in 1957. With a main span of 260 m long, it introduced the harp-shaped cable system with parallel stays and a freestanding pylon. In 1960, Maracaibo Bridge in Venezuela (8.7km long with 135 spans) was inaugurated two years later, which is the first multi-span PC cable-stayed bridge in the world. Both of, pylons and deck were made of concrete, thereby introducing a structural material that had not before been used in the main elements of cable supported bridges. The Sunshine Skyway Bridge (1982) in Tampa, Florida, had set a new record for concrete bridges, with a main span of 365 m long, and was the first CSB to attach cables to the center of its roadway as opposed to the outer edges. The next year, Dames Point Bridge in Jacksonville, Florida, exceeded the previous record held by the Sunshine Skyway Bridge. One decade before 1980s, the structural system was confined mainly by United States and Western Europe; which found application in the past three decades all over the world because of it economy and elegant appearance. Nowadays, CSB were adopted widely in Asian countries and most of the bridges with the longest spans are located in Asia, particularly in China and Japan. The Yunyang Bridge in Sichuan province, completed in 1975, is one of the earliest CSB in China. Over the last thirty years, the rapid development of cables structures, particularly CSB (with medium span over 600 m), reflected the growing interest in construction. Some famous bridges build included: the (602 m) Shanghai's Yangpu Bridge (1994) with main span of 602 m, which was surpassed within a half year by the Normandy France Bridge (1995) with its central span of 856 m long, the Sutong Bridge (Yangtze River, China in 2008) with central span of 1088 m exceeds the previously record held by the Tatara Bridge (1999) with central span of 890 m in Japan (Hiroshima), and come from behind is the Russky Bridge (2012) with central span of 1104 m.
Page 3
The project cases above show that this technique could be applied to an area previously reserved for suspension bridges. CSB structures require modern technology and high quality materials in which the cables are probably the most important component. In addition, comparing the RC and PC bridges are more economically competitive and aesthetically superior due to the employment of high-strength materials. Therefore, in order to expand span lengths over 1000m, designers have always expected to design economical structures that are safe, usable, and durable [7,12,14,30,45]. Until today, the box girder section was the last solution found, for PC bridges, to built greater spans in terms of the bridges super structures. And this is due to its characteristics such as the material of construction (timber, concrete and steel or a combination of materials such as RC, PC deck and steel stringers, typical for many highway bridges super-structures), the span lengths, the structural forms/types, the load path characteristics, usage, moveable bridges position and the type of deck for combination. A great number of CSB fit in with most surrounding environments and can be varied by modifying the tower and cable arrangements, have been designed and constructed in the worldwide
[3-4]
choice in the worldwide. According to the CSB arrangement system, four major basic classes are keeping until now (Walther, 1981): cables are made nearly parallel by attaching cables to various points on the pylon(s) and the height of attachment of each cable on the pylon is similar to the interval from the pylon along the roadway to its lower attachment in a harp design. Contrary to a harp, in a fan design all the cables are connect or pass over the top of the pylon(s). The Semi-Harp system and Asymmetric system, the common systems in CSB are the fan and harp systems. The first is mostly used in the form of a changed fan system in which the cable anchorage points are extend over a certain height at the pylon top. During the rigidity studying offered by the system of cable stay itself and by deducing that the pylon and the girder provide the axial resistance while the fan-shaped system was defined by Gimsing as a system which is stable of the first order [27]. Cable-stays are basically disposed in two dispositions which are two plane systems and single plane systems. Originally, sections of the box girder were adopted for torsion and lateral rigidity of the deck. A-frames, Trapezoidal portal frames, single or twin pylons, inverted Y shaped and other forms are the various possible shapes of pylon construction and alternative solution to suspension bridges for long spans
[5]
section in bending, along with the stays, which significantly reduces possible rotary
Southwest Jiaotong University Master Degree Thesis motion of the running surface (deck)
[47]
Page 4
shaped and other forms. A combination of different forms, such as parallel double, inclined or central single cable plane accompanied by a variety of different shape of the bridge towers, forming the rigid tower and light style floating bridge deck. CSB is a high statically indeterminate structure which can be analyzed and calculated in practical application by the method known as FEA. Deformation of the geometric nonlinear factors must be taken into consideration for long-span CSB. These structures have been designed with the primary objective of avoiding failure under static and dynamic loads and can be used to gain insight into the traffic flow. Furthermore, to the amendment the cable sag nonlinear impact Ernst formula in 1970s has been the CSB as a general linear elastic structure, according to the method of the ordinary linear displacement theory of structural mechanics analysis, which is an approximation processing method. But seventy years later, due to the emergence of long-span CSB, and the development of computational structural mechanics began finite displacement theory application to the analysis of the cable-stayed bridge up. The more mature approach is to use the moving coordinate iterative method to consider large displacements. Ernst formula correction cord elastic modulus considers the stay cables sag nonlinear impact introducing stability factor to consider the effect of the beam and column. CSB and others bridges type have some characteristics: span 250 ~ 600 m CSB is the most competitive bridge type, 600 ~ 1000 m, and cable-stayed bridge is the only suspension bridge competition opponents, where the stiffening girder moments can be reduce. The moments in the girders and supporting pylons can be controlled by a suitable choice of stay cables; uniform distribution of forces in pylons and deck girders results in efficient material utilization. CSB is adjustable in the construction process and operated for cable tension adjustment, it has a very important feature. Developed from the classical suspension bridges with cables anchored at the abutments and supported by solid pylons or towers, CSB deck system is supported by the hanger cables suspended from the pylons. Relatively to the suspension bridge, the overall stiffness of CSB which makes its under live load deflection is much smaller than the same span of suspension bridge. To understand more the behavior of the structure, comparison should be making between the load/displacement with strength/ductility. These researches enhance the current knowledge in understanding the structural behavior of the long-span CSB with unequal heights of pylons.
Page 5
Page 6
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
Figure 1.1 View of different styles of cable-stayed bridges with different heights of pylons (a) Ganzhuxi River Bridge; (b) Jiangxi Hukou Bridge; (c) Wadi Laban, Riyadh Bridge; (d) Jingzhou Yangtze River Bridge; (e) Yunyang Yangtze River Bridge; (f) Second Fuling Wujiang Bridge
Page 7
Bridge Name Shuangbei Jiangxi Hukou jingzhou Yangtze Wadi Leban Ting Kau Shandong Binzhou bridge Yunyang Yangtze River Ganzhuxi main bridge Fuling Wujiang
Location Chongqing Jiangxi Hubei Riyadh Rambler Channel Shandong Chongqing Guangdong Chongqing
Countries China China China Saudi Arabia Hong Kong China China China China
Main Span(m) 330 636 700 405 475 300/300 1278.6 402 340
Open to Traffic 2009 2000 2002 2000 1998 2004 2005 2009
Page 8
To ensure the Fuling Wujiang bridge life, health monitoring was developed to study its long-term behavior under normal operating conditions and to evaluate its structural health condition. In scale, it was the biggest project at Chongqing, which the operation construction started in October 2004, and was completed in September 25, 2009 with an overall cost of 36 million Chinese Yuan. It is a rare CSB with asymmetrical towers. (b) Structure The framework of this research covers the Second Fuling Wujiang River Bridge with the total length of 1700m (5,577ft). The main span 340m(1,120ft) long and both side spans are 150m(492ft) and 100 m(328ft). To arrange a cable-stays spacing of 6, 4.4, and 4.2 meters, and inclined cable position in the both towers of the rope from unity is 2.0 m. The main girder is of a composite steel box girder structure, which is based on the deck structure. The bridge has carries 4 lanes of highway traffic and 2 pedestrian lanes separated by a 5.5m (18ft) median strip where the central pylons are located on the 25.5m (84ft) wide deck. The superstructure is made out of hollow steel sections, whereas the towers substructures are made of reinforced concrete. The geometrical parameters are discussed in detail below for the mathematical model. The side to main span ratio ls/lm has a low value of 150.00/340.00=0.441 and 100.00/340.00=0.294 (Max girder deflection). The towers heights to bridge length ratio H1/L are 105.40/590.00=0.178 and 66.40/590.00=0.112 (Max tower deflection). The deck under-surface from the surface of the earth H2/H is respectively 73/178.40=0.409 and 63/129.40=0.487 respectively. Therefore, the box girder in the side span is filled with concrete to act as a counterweight. Detailed plans on the girder sections and cable diameter employed in the bridge are given in the chapter3. The dispositions and dimensions of the towers cross sections can be found in the chapter3 as well.
Table 1.2 Input-output
Input side to main span ratio ls/lm Tower height to bridge length ratio H1/L Tower box width Tower box depth Range Upper Lower 0.441 0.294 0.178 12.20m 14.20m 0.112 7.20m 11.20m Outputs Max girder deflection Max tower deflection Max tower moment Max tower moment
Page 9
Figure 1.2 General layout of Fuling River Bridge over Wujiang River (Units: cm)
Figure 1.3 Arrangement plan of the main tower section (Units: cm)
Page 10
The main bridge dimensions are shown in the Table1.3 provided below and a summary of the geometric data can also be seen.
Table 1.3 Main Geometric Data of Fuling Wujiang River Bridge
Type of bridge Name of the bridge Name of the river Location Total length Spans length(L) Length main span (lm) Length sides spans Height pylon above girder( h) Total height H pylon concrete pylons Number of cables main span Number of cables side span Cable spacing main span Cable spacing side span Segment length Length key-segment Total number of lanes Minimum navigational clearance Number of concrete pylons Towers deck under-surface from the surface of the earth Height of river piers Total number of piers Total number of piles Depth of piles Total number of cables Average weight of cables Length of cables Cable Elastic or Youngs Modulus Concrete Elastic or Youngs Modulus Steel Elastic or Youngs Modulus Mass Density (Concrete) Cable-stayed Second Fuling Wujiang River Fuling Wujiang Fuling, Chongqing, China
1700.00m 590.00m 340.00m 150.00 / 100.00m 105.40 / 66.40m 178.40 / 129.40m 53 33 / 20 6.00m 4.20 / 4.40m 6.00m 6.00m
Bridge 4
2
73 / 63 m
31.177 m
1
59 Reinforced Concrete piles
25 / 24 / 34 / 35 m
2.05 E 05 MPa
2500 Kg / m 3
Page 11
7850 Kg / m3
LL 3.6 kN/m all over the span(4.0 kN/m2 intensity
n = 0.30
Various from 104.532 to 136.275 mm 50 Km / h for bridge
China Code September 2009
100 years
RMB 260 million
Page 12
We shall try to show from an existing data whether this type of bridge is really a better solution between Girder Bridge and cable-stayed bridge. Therefore the structure would be helpful in studying the behavior of bridges under normal operating conditions. In the particular case of bridges with unequal height of pylons, it is especially important to choose an appropriate scheme of initial cable forces while the bridge is under dead load only. This research is of great business significance to the bridge engineers since the integration of domain expertise in the structural bridge process is looked forward to push for better structural results of the customers. Besides this work will also have an academic significance enclosed to it since which will form a basis for future extensions to this subject. One common analysis must be run against the cable-stayed bridge with unequal height of pylons database and find sets of items that appear together in many cases of this structure. If such kind of task is to be undertaken, then our research work will not be under-estimated.
1.4 OBJECTIVES
This proposed research primarily aims is to conduct in depth a study of the structural behavior of long span PC cable-stayed bridge with unequal height of pylons. Specifically, to improve their performance, these kinds of systems need to have more and more item-ratings. The design of the bridge makes the relevant recommendations as specific objectives of this project: The original design in variety of load combination, which is the characteristics of bridge structure stress and displacement, will be analyzed and then the horizontal and vertical stiffness of the bridge checked; Identify the issues faced by project participators during implementation of cablesstayed bridge; Proposal for the first issues how to improve the behavior of the bridge structure during construction and operating of the process; Learn civil engineering software as a tool and using skillfully FEM program such as MIDAS/Civil software; Simulate and analyze the static and dynamic characteristics of the whole model; Analyzed the differences in the forces distribution following the connection case and organized further calculations about the relationship between stiffness of deck, piers and pylons.
Page 13
Moreover, researches include investigating the static and dynamic behavior of the structural system, seeking to find a remedy for the shortcoming similar existence and provide a clear and comprehensive definition of this type of structure. The following are the main questions that the research should answer: Where we are now (structural system design parameters and criteria)? What is the structural behavior of long span cable-stayed bridges with unequal heights of pylons? What shall we suggest of a layout to give to the future similar bridge design?
named MIDAS/Civil to simulate the complete model and large scale of the design. Bridge finite element model will be created for static and construction analysis.
Page 14
Moreover, multiple plots and figures will show and compare the different shapes. The various results of the comparative analysis and the meaning of each shape will be discussed in depth. Structural behavior is beyond the scope of our research. However, the outcome of this study cannot be the situation of all construction processes in CSB.
In Chapter 5 lastly, we conclude our research; give some recommendations and calls attention to further related areas of research that may be useful. Extra to the chapters, additional results and input data for the analysis are provided in: NOTATIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS REFERENCES
Page 15
ally the structure of the matrix displacement method, similar to the basic principles of structural mechanics displacement method. The basic unknowns are the nodal displacements and equilibrium equations to solve the unknown quantity, and then calculate
Page 16
the structure internal forces. The procedure of structure FE analysis solving can be outlined as follows: Structural discretization Structure is usually divided into a number of different members, which is referred to as a unit suitable for analysis and will be connected with a junction point. The entire structure has become a limited cell assembly, which is the structural discretization. The finite deformation with a discrete FE modal is the most powerful tool utilised in the nonlinear analysis of the recent cable-stayed bridge. Discretization can be refers to the material area translation process of an objectbased model into an analytical model apt for analysis. In structural analysis, discretization can affect two basic analytic model types, containing: In a 3D system, each node has six DOF, each either constrained or free. The geometric and material properties of the structural elements are then characterized by line elements which simulate their physical behavior by following the mathematical relationships. Through application of the direct stiffness method, loading at node locations translates into displacement and stress fields which indicate structural performance. FE Model that a meshing procedure created a network of line elements and connected by nodes within a material continuum. Every line element of the local material simulates the structure physical properties and its geometric as well. The whole system loading and boundary conditions must be define, and the structural response digital formulation through the computational model as well. Element analysis The fundamental analysis must taken account the establishment of the element stiffness matrix. And each unit must be cut at its ends junction structure internal forces which acting on the unit cross section at both ends. Overall analysis As a synthese of the overall structure, each unit must be set while the deformation compatibility conditions and the equilibrium conditions at each junction must be satisfying. Then to solve these kinds of problems, we must combine the equilibrium conditions of the force with the compatibility conditions of displacements. Computer codes technology are the main tools of the modern engineering design process in the structural field. Many computer programs were promoted during the last several decades in the design of the engineer domain. Structure analysis has been a great breakthrough abroad and has appeared in many large-scale general-purpose FE
Page 17
analysis program, such as MIDAS, ANSYS, MSC/NASTRAN, SAP 2000, Algor (Super Sap), which are an Educational Version, limited in modules, numbers of nodes and elements available for students and academic staff [9]. Many others programs are also developed in the academic institutes, but these are completely baseless. On the other hand, ADINA, ABAQUS and SESAM are used in industry. These procedures pre/postprocessing has a good interface, convenient, powerful computational analysis capabilities and open secondary development system. For bridge engineering industry in the country, a large number of scholars, engineers design these general-purpose FE analysis program with the bridge structure to calculate the combination of extensive MIDAS and ANSYS number. MIDAS is bridge simulation software which has been widely used in a various bridge design cases and construction calculation. This thesis is to use MIDAS in space beam/bar element modeling and analysis.
Page 18
by CSB under the influence of the environmental loads such as moving/traffic loading, the gusts of strong wind and seismic [20, 22]. These influences have the effects as to provoke the vibration of the bridge structure, which augment the static internal forces. Moreover, in the severe cases can lead to the complete destruction of the bridge structure. On other hand, the influence of the dynamic deformations of the pylons and also the serious influence of the axial forces of the stiffening girders/deck, caused by the cable-tensions excite the bridge in a simultaneous axial dynamic movement. The CSB dynamic analysis is concerned with its seismic resistant and aerodynamic stability behavior of which, it is necessary to determinate the natural frequencies and principal modes of the bridge structure vibration. Therefore, bridge design calculation contains the content of the vehicle dynamic action of long-span CSB which still needs through the theoretical calculation and wind tunnel test to test bridge aerodynamic stability.
Page 19
times, the force and geometric stiffness matrix also increases times, as shows the following formula:
[ KD] + [ KG]
{} = {F}
(2.1)
If is too large, the structure reaches the equilibrium state and the node displacement matrix
[ KD] + [ KG]
{ }
= {0}
(2.3)
[ KD]
[ KDL] + [ KG]
{ }
= {F}
(2.4)
[ KDL] Considering
structure matrix; with {F} External load increment; [ KDL] geometric nonlinearity. Considering the geometric nonlinear deformation leads to the change of the coordinate reference system, the geometric parameters of the stiffness matrix changes by
Page 20
For the nonlinear incremental equilibrium equation of the formula (2.4), General incremental-Newton Raphson iterative method can be used to solve. Considering the CSB structure geometric and material nonlinear incremental equilibrium,we can write the following equation:
[ KT ] + [ KG]
{ }
= {F}
(2.5)
, cast-in-situ constructions have benefices for CSB because during the erection it
allows some limited tensile stresses. So, with an ideal state for the final construction, the bridge structure is in good conditions to experience limited live load which mainly produce no tensile stress in the concrete elements.
Page 21
Many long-span concrete stays bridges have been built in China and most of them were built by cantilever launching and some by cantilever casting method. The Second Fuling Wujiang River Bridge with a span of 340 m long was between the first one built by this method in China and was finished in 2009.
Technical process It consists of erecting the majority of the bridge deck without falsework or scaffolding at ground level, by working in consecutive sections known as segments, which are cantilevered out from the preceding segment. After a segment is built, the next step is the prestressing tendons which are fixed to the extremities before tensioning. They are strongly attached to the existing segments which form a self-supporting cantilever and serves as a support for the following operations. The construction stage result is sum up in the following Table 2.1.
Table 2.1 Different staging construction
Phase (a) Site clearance and platform erection, construction of substructures such as foundation pile grouting in cofferdam, bearing platform, and piers body. Finish up the piles, caps meanwhile building the pier, low and height towers respectively 31.177, 63, 73 m long above the differences caps. (b) Construct of Seg.No.0# main-beam segment on the scaffold, cast-in-site support method when the height of tower has reached the elevation of the deck meanwhile continue to build the tower until reach the height of top when Seg.No.0# main beam segment reach its strength, stretching the prestressed tendon. Before move to the next construction sequence, checks the each main towers and the joint which connect tower and pier. See if it fits the requirements of design and the code. STAGING CONSTRUCTION
Page 22
(f) Remove the derrick cranes in the side-spans. Then cast the key/main closure segment of middle span in order to finish up the whole bridge. When the closure segment reaches its strength, remove the derrick crane, supports and temporary piers. Stretch all the rest longitudinal prestressed reinforcement in the girder. To adjust all the whole bridge cable force. Lay the bridge deck pavement and the footway. Do the experiment of loading when finished. Works Completion and opens to traffic.
Page 23
Page 24
Boundaries conditions (BC) or constrains The boundary conditions for the construction of the bridge are as follows: What kind of boundaries is? For all the whole bridge supports? (See Figure 3.1) For the Girder and the pier? For cable: elastic link 106? (See Figure 3.2 ) For pier and girder: rigid joints 2? (See Figure 3.3) According to the actual bearing disposition and tower beam consolidation situation, this bridge constraint simulation is as follows: Tower stay node for consolidation point, tower beam common node and the corresponding set beam element stiffness domain, the left side pier only support constraint vertical line displacement. Elastic link allows to define six stiffness value whose three rotations and three directions, and in that case all degrees of freedom are define to generate a rigid connection. All the boundary conditions considered are made for the Wujiang Bridge design in the finite element model.
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Figure 3.5 Configuration of both towers elevation with its cross sections
The whole bridge layout is showing in the Figure 3.6, with 106 cables and the average cable weight is 10.029t . The lower and higher towers cable numbers are respectively for both left side L20' ~ L1' $ H 33 ~ H1 and for the both right side are
L1 ~ L 20 $ H 1' ~ H 33' as illustrated the Figure.3.6. The cable stays transfer large
forces to the pylon top, and as consequence, it is prestressed longitudinally and transversally [46]. To determine the process of analysis, the cable-stayed type parameters are calculation in the following Table3.2.
Page 28
Figure 3.6 Configuration of cables (106 cables from higher to lower tower)
Page 29
Cross-sectional area
(m )
2
PES7-187
10
7.1995e-3 8.5855e-3
PES7-223
22
PES7-253
26
9.7405e-3 1.15885e-2
PES7-301
35
PES7-379
11
L20'L15' , H27'H31'
1.45915e-2 1.62085e-2
PES7-421
H32'H33'
Geometrical and material characteristics Prestressed and cables systems The longitudinal prestressing low relaxation prestressed steel strand and cablestayed materials. The standard strength fpk = 1860 Mpa Elastic modulus E y = 1.95 105Mpa . Concrete The main beam and the main tower C50 concrete, with Ec = 3.45 104Mpa. Control parameters
Southwest Jiaotong University Master Degree Thesis The anchor under control tensile stress: con =0.75 f pk =1395MPa The final value of creep coefficient: = 2.0 The final value of shrinkage strain:
= 2.4 E 04
Page 30
StayedCable
Reinforcing steel
Prestressing bars
7 wire 670
200 86.96 83.3 0.300
5
j15.24 strand186 0
195 84.78 86 0.300
5
32 steel bar
200 86.96 83.3 0.300
Material
Modulus of Elasticity in shear; G P a Gravity density kN/m3 Poison Ratio, Thermal/ Expansion GG Area FF EE DD CC BB AA GG
10
10
10
10
10
10 5
0.0008038
28.27 12.74 50.52 14.46 25.08 115.3 5 681.3 7 503.9 6 1520. 3 534.2 5 638.7 5 4659. 9 50.64 29.81 26.5 15.5 11.9
76.59 48.2 36.25 31.86 26.33 19.70 15.42 1712. 9 893.5 5 360.1 3 77.44 55.44 46.92 24.89
0.00266 0.0021
(m )
2
Geometrical
Inertia
4
FF EE DD CC BB AA
(m )
Southwest Jiaotong University Master Degree Thesis The shear modulus of the beam elements was evaluated as:
G = E / 2 (1 + ) ;
Page 31
with = 0.3 .
(3.1)
Cables-stayed bridge, a non linear structural system in which the main girder is supported elastically at the points along its length by inclined cables stays. The Axial stiffness bridge system, changes the non-linearly with cable tension and cable sagging. Three sources usually maybe cause this geometric nonlinearity such as: the cable sagging; the bending interaction and axial force and the large displacements. Cable rigidity is characterized by the product
A E eq
of elasticity E efficient which is expressed in k N . The equivalent modulus of elasticity approach was earlier promoted by Ernst (1965) and four decades later by Ren and Peng (2005). On other hand, three mainly approaches to the nonlinear behavior of cable elements frequently adopted while modeling cables in cable-stayed bridges and it can be referred to as the equivalent modulus approach and has been used by several investigators
[16,17,19,26]
. Each cable is replaced by one truss element which has the same cable
E eq / E
relying on the
length of the cable horizontal projection, for different values of tensile stress milt. The cables curves are derived from the Ernst formula. However, the Modulus of each cable should be adjusted with Ernst formula as:
E
e q
= 1 +
1 2
)
3
(3.2)
2
- E is the cable material effective elastic modulus, which is equal to 195 kN / mm 2 - is the weight per unit volume of cable steel: 78.5 kN / m 3 - l is the horizontal projection length of the cable stay, in m
c
- is the stress of the strand (tension in the cables), in N / mm 2 Midas/civil program has used for cable nonlinear analysis. In the Midas software program, the cables simulation was adopted to simulate the single cable plane, without transfer of bending moment and torque. Geometric nonlinear analysis and calculation of the non-linearity stiffness of the cable unit was accomplished.
Page 32
Cable number
Elastic modulus
Cable number
Elastic modulus
Cable number
Elastic modulus
Cable number
Elastic modulus
Cable number
Elastic modulus
( GPa)
L20' L19' L18' L17' L16' L15' L14' L13' L12' L11' L10' L9' L8' L7' L6' L5' L4' L3' L2' L1' L1 193.31 193.32 193.39 193.46 194.26 194.34 194.42 194.43 194.66 194.71 194.74 194.79 194.88 194.9 194.92 194.94 194.95 194.98 194.95 L4 L5 L6 L7 L8 L9 L10 L11 L12 L13 L14 L15 L16 L17 L18 L19 L20 H33 H32 193.48 193.41 L2 L3
( GPa)
194.88 194.82 194.74 194.66 194.57 194.49 194.04 193.74 193.78 193.74 192.77 192.64 192.5 192.29 192.32 192.32 192.1 192.31 191.73 181.73 188.22 H31 H30 H29 H28 H27 H26 H25 H24 H23 H22 H21 H20 H19 H18 H17 H16 H15 H14 H13 H12 H11
( GPa)
187.83 187.88 187.33 187.4 187.97 188.07 188.2 188.63 188.83 188.97 189.33 189.55 189.84 189.76 191.89 191.54 191.98 192.15 192.4 192.5 193.35 H10 H9 H8 H7 H6 H5 H4 H3 H2 H1 H1' H2' H3' H4' H5' H6' H7' H8' H9' H10' H11'
( GPa)
193.47 193.62 194.25 194.37 194.72 194.78 194.82 194.87 194.92 194.97 194.97 194.97 194.96 194.95 194.9 194.87 194.85 194.82 194.79 194.77 194.63 H12' H13' H14' H15' H16' H17' H18' H19' H20' H21' H22' H23' H24' H25' H26' H27' H28' H29' H30' H31' H32' H33'
( GPa)
194.58 194.55 194.51 194.46 194.41 194.38 194.38 194.38 194.35 193.87 193.85 193.87 193.8 193.74 193.68 192.18 192.08 191.94 191.96 191.73 190.46 191.53
Page 33
Structure self-weight. A permanent load include the main beam self-weight and heavy cross pressure in order to maintain the asymmetrical CSB with three spans Dead Load balanced side. PC; RC unit weight = 26kN / m3 ; the side spans ballast 550kN / m. By uniform load applied on the main beam side cross-unit. The pavement thickness 80mm, = 25kN/m asphalt concrete 70 mm, 3 ; Secondary Load
= 24kN / m3
. The crash barrier = 8kN / m per side sidewalk structure 18kN / m , central
green belt and cable-stayed isolation with 16kN / m; a total of two dead load of 200kN / m are uniformly distributed load applied on the main beam unit. Asphalt pavement, guardrail etc. in total: 91.3kN / m Pedestrian Load Press 4kN/m2 load range for sidewalks and slow lane 2m wide, uniform load
24 kN / m
Bidirectional four lane road, level: lane load uniformed distributed load = 10.5KN / mconcentrated load = 360kN Impact coefficient (factor) u 0.0 5 Live/Imposed Load
(in
(JT G
D 6 0 2 0 0 4 ). p d f )
Temperature Load
Average annual temperature: 18.17; closure temperature: 1525Concrete temperature annual maximum increase: 18.5 concrete temperature annual maximum decrease: 18.5Temperature difference between girder and cable: 10 Gradient temperature difference of the girder, the value based on 100mm depth of bituminous pavement. Hundred-year wind speed value in Chongqing Fuling City: V10=24.4m/s The combination of wind and the car load speed by deck, with the consideration of longitudinal wind effect of the main tower. Main bridge tower settlement value 1.0cm for main tower, 0.5cm for side pier According to the specification, pier boat collision force to take cross-bridge to 400kN, Fuling, to take 350kN. Basic design earthquake acceleration value of 0.15g, and the design characteristic period of 0.35s.
Wind Load
Earthquake Load
Page 34
According to the General Code for Design of highway bridges and culverts JTG D60-2004 [43], basic combinations role in the short/long-term effects of a combination of the standard value combinations, each load combination selected coefficients are calculated according to the specifications. Before the construction of sub and superstructure part of the bridge construction and the finally completed bridge deck system, traffic engineering and other ancillary works must be done. Therefore, it is known that the safety of the structure depends on the adequate load-bearing capacity establishment and the prestress effect must be included as well as those due to creep and shrinkage of the temperature changing and the settlement. Load combination and definition: It is well-known that design stresses should be calculated for the most severe combinations cases of loads and forces. Where, the load combinations are mostly considered important for the bridge structure adequacy checking. Temperature combination 1 STI + PTDCG + TIGR + TIOST With: STI- System Temperature Increase; PTDCG- Positive Temperature Difference between Cable and Girder; TIGR- Temperature Increase in Girder Roof; TIOST- Temperature Increase in one side of Tower and the Temperature combination 2STD + NTDCG + TDGR With: STD- System Temperature Decrease; NTDCG- Negative Temperature Difference between Cable-Girder and TDGR- Temperature Decrease in Girder Roof Load combination I DL+LL+DSF Load combination II Load combination I Wind Load Temperature combination 1 Load combination III Load combination I Wind Load Temperature combination 2 Load combination IV DL+ Overspread Pedestrian Load + Wind Load Temperature With: DL- Dead Load; LL- Live Load (include vehicle load and pedestrian load) and DSFDifferential Settlement of the Foundation Combination 1 Load combination VDL+ Overspread Pedestrian Load + WL Temperature Load
Page 35
We always take the load combination I as a main Load combination and the rest additional load combination in the CSB construction control.
Page 36
Construction contents
Activate Seg.No0 of Tower2, and its pre-stress tendon , Wet concrete weigh, diaphragm, derrick cram1
Temp1 CS43
Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.1 Activate Seg.No1 of Tower2, and its pre-stress tendon , Diaphragm, Wet concrete weight, Tendon Cable H1 and H1
0.1 10
Activate Derrick cram2, Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.2, Deactivate derrick cram1 Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.2 Activate Seg.No2 of Tower2, and its Pre-stress tendon , Diaphragm, Tendon Cable H2 and H2
9 0.1 1
CS44-1 CS52-1
Activate Derrick cram3, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.3, Deactivate derrick cram2 Activate derrick cram11, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.11, First 10 Balance weight ,Adjust Cable force H7, Deactivate derrick cram10
9 9
TEMP11 CS53
Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.11 Activate Seg.No12 of Tower2, Diaphragm, Tendon Cable H11 and H11 its Pre-stress tendon
0.1 1
CS53-1
Activate derrick cram12, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.11, Balance weight H11, Deactivate derrick cram11
TEMP12 CS54
Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.12 Activate Seg.No12 of Tower2, Seg.No0 of Tower1, Diaphragms, Tendon Cable H11 and H11 its Pre-stress tendon
0.1 1
Activate derrick cram13, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.13Deactivate derrick cram12 Deactivate Balance weight H12, Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.13 Activate Seg.No13 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H12 and H12Seg.No1 of Tower1 Pre-stress tendon , Diaphragms
9 0.1 1
Activate derrick cram14, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.14, Deactivate derrick cram13 Deactivate Balance weight H13, Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.14 Activate Seg.No14 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H13 and H13, Seg.No2 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L1 and L1, Pre-stress tendon , Diaphragms
9 0.1 1
Activate derrick cram15, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.15, Deactivate derrick cram14 Deactivate Counter weight H14, Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.15 Activate Seg.No15 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H14 and H14, Seg.No3 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L2 and L2, Pre-stress tendon , Diaphragms
9 0.1 1
CS57A, TEMP16
Activate derrick cram16, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.16, Deactivate derrick cram16 Deactivate Balance weight H15, Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.16
9 0.1
Page 37
1
Activate Seg.No16 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H15 and H15, Seg.No4 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L3 and L3, Pre-stress tendon , Diaphragms
Activate derrick cram17, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.17, Deactivate derrick cram17 Deactivate Balance weight H16, Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.17 Activate Seg.No17 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H16 and H16, Seg.No5 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L4 and L4, Pre-stress tendon , Diaphragms
9 0.1 1
CS59A
Activate derrick cram18, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.18, Lower tower adjusted force and Balance weight of tower 1, Deactivate derrick cram17
TEMP18 CS60
Deactivate Balance weight H17, Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.18 Activate Seg.No18 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H17 and H17, Seg.No6 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L5 and L5, Diaphragms
0.1 1
Activate derrick cram23, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.23, Deactivate derrick cram22 Deactivate Balance weight H22, Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.23 Activate Seg.No23 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H22 and H22, Seg.No11 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L10 and L10, Diaphragms, Pre-stress, Temporary Balance weight 23 and construction Balance weight 12 in east side, Balance weight H23
9 0.1 1
CS65A
Activate derrick cram24, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.24, Temporary Balance weight 23, construction counter weight 23; Deactivate derrick cram23, Temporary Balance weight 23, Balance weight H23
TEMP24 CS66
Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.24 Activate Seg.No24 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H23 and H23, Seg.No12 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L11 and L11, Diaphragms, Pre-stress, Temporary Balance weight 24 and construction Balance weight 13 in east side, Balance weight H24
0.1 1
CS66A
Activate derrick cram25, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.25, Temporary Balance weight 24, Balance weight 24; Deactivate derrick cram24, Temporary Balance weight 24, Balance weight H24
TEMP25 CS67
Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.25 Activate Seg.No25 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H24 and H24, Seg.No13 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L12 and L12, Diaphragms, Pre-stress, Temporary Balance weight 25, counter weight H25
0.1 1
ACS2 CS67A
Activate Patch Tendon H8/9/10 Activate derrick cram26, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.26, Temporary Balance weight 25, Balance weight 25; Deactivate derrick cram25, Temporary Balance weight 24, Balance weight H24
2 9
TEMP26 CS68
Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.26 Activate Seg.No26 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H25 and H25, Seg.No14 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L13 and L13, Diaphragms, Pre-stress, Temporary Balance weight 25, Balance weight H25
0.1 1
CS68A
Activate derrick cram27, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.27, Temporary Balance weight
Page 38
26, Balance weight 26; Deactivate derrick cram26, Temporary Balance weight 25, Balance weight H25 TEMP27 CS69 Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.27 Activate Seg.No27 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H26 and H26, Seg.No15 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L14 and L14, Diaphragms, Pre-stress, Temporary Balance weight 26, Balance weight H27 CS69A Activate derrick cram28, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.28, Temporary Balance weight 27, Balance weight 27; Deactivate derrick cram27, Temporary Balance weight 26, Balance weight H26 TEMP28 CS70 Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.28 Activate Seg.No28 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H27 and H27, Seg.No16 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L15 and L15, Diaphragms, Pre-stress, Temporary Balance weight 14 and 15, Balance weight H27, Deactivate Temporary Balance weight 14 CS70A Activate derrick cram29, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.29, Balance weight H28 and L15, Deactivate derrick cram28, Temporary Balance weight 28, TEMP29 CS71 Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.29 Activate Seg.No29 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H28 and H28, Seg.No17 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L16 and L16, Diaphragms, Pre-stress, Temporary Balance weight 15 , Balance weight H29, Deactivate Temporary Balance weight 15 CS71A Activate derrick cram30, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.30, Balance weight H29 and L16, Deactivate derrick cram29, Temporary Balance weight 29 TEMP30 CS72 Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.30 Activate Seg.No30 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H29 and H29, Seg.No18 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L17 and L17, Diaphragms, Pre-stress, counter weight H30, Deactivate Temporary Balance weight 15 CS72A Activate derrick cram31, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.31, Balance weight H30 and L17, Deactivate derrick cram30, Temporary counter weight 30 TEMP31 CS73 Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.31 Activate Seg.No31 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H30 and H30, Seg.No19 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L18 and L18, Diaphragms, Pre-stress, Balance weight H31, CS73A Activate derrick cram32, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.32, Balance weight H31 and L18, Deactivate derrick cram31, Temporary Balance weight 31 TEMP32 CS74 Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.32 Activate Seg.No32 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H31 and H31, Seg.No20 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L19 and L19, Diaphragms, Pre-stress, Balance weight H32, Temporary support and side pier CS74-00 Activate derrick cram 1, Balance weight H33, H32, L20 and L19, Deactivate Temporary Balance weight 13, 14, 15, 23, 24,25,26, and H32 CS74-0 CS74A Activate side span closure stiff skeleton Activate side closure parts 3 3 4 0.1 1 9 0.1 1 9 0.1 1 9 0.1 1 9 0.1 1 9 0.1 1
Page 39
4 0.1 2
Activate derrick cram33, Wet concrete weight of Seg.No.33, Deactivate derrick cram32 Deactivate Wet concrete weight of Seg.N0.33 Activate Seg.No33 of Tower2, Tendon Cable H32 and H32,Seg.No20 of Tower1 Tendon Cable L19 and L19, Diaphragms, Pre-stress, Balance weight H32, Temporary support and side pier
Activate Key Segment, Deactivate derrick cram1, and all the closure derrick crams Activate the middle and sides pre-stress Activate the sides span temporary supports, all cable adjusted force Activate secondary dead load Operation stage
7 7 8 8 1100
Page 40
The maximum and minimum stresses are respectively 633.12MPa (Cable H9 and H10) and 348.89MPa (Cable L20, L20 and H33). The detail of the displacement of both towers top can be seen in Figure 3.26. The above figures show that the stresses of all the members sections considering can meet the requirements of corresponding design and construction code at each phase. The Wujiang Bridge state stress is reasonable and the girder's level smoothness can meet the requirements of the bridge design and code. Therefore, we can say that the structure construction quality is showed to have been under a good control.
Page 41
Figure 3.13 Stresses of both towers bottom section at different construction stages
As the Figure 3.11 shows, the Tower 1 maximum and minimum displacement are respectively 113.7mm; -138.3 mm and CS 61; CS 76 are their correspondant stages. The Tower 2 maximum and minimum displacement are respectively 189.1mm; 140.34mm and CS 76; CS 52 are their correspondant stages. The Figure 3.12 shows that the Lower Tower minimum and maximum stress are respectively 0.75; 5.75 and CS 54; CS 79 are their correspondant stages. Higher Tower minimum and maximum stress are respectively 1.25; 6.75 and CS1; CS79 are their correspondant stages. For the Figure 3.13, the Lower Tower minimum and maximum stress are respectively 2.5; 7.5 and CS 1; CS 79 are their correspondant stages. The Higher Tower minimum and maximum stress are respectively 2.9 ; 7.75 and CS1; CS79 are their correspondant stages.
Page 42
linear structure of the internal forces. In the bridge construction process state, attention is specially given to their tension on construction and finished dead state. The process is described in 3.2.1 according to the construction phase, which can be calculated each cable-stayed construction tension. The operational phase of the completed bridge shows, according to a different bridge state load combination, that the stress are less than the allowable stress 813.6MPa specification (less than con =0.75 f pk =1395MPa ) and the operational phase cable stress amplitude is less than the product limit 200 MPa. Therefore, it is a necessity to simulate and to correct the parameter error if need be in the construction state in order to meet the design requirements. The permanent state of stress in a CSB structure subjected to dead load is determined by the tension forces in the cable stays. Therefore cable tension can be chosen in ordr to eliminated or to reduce as much as possible the bending moments in the pylons and girders. So the pylon and deck would be principally under compression under the dead loads as well [41, 43].
Table 3.7 Construction and finished cable force
Closure state without secondary load (KN) 4657.49 5927.30 5635.71 5511.73 5807.95 5803.23 5869.81 5630.07 5130.67 5232.50 4901.07 5078.26 4995.92 5003.73 4944.08 4687.38 4152.39 4081.77 Finished state with secondary load (KN) 6905.41 7966.87 7465.37 6927.90 7153.34 7080.36 6836.45 6547.09 6000.10 6056.29 5558.15 5699.88 5582.07 5620.40 5451.68 5156.30 4577.57 4455.45 Closure state without secondary load (KN) 5107.61 4812.83 4806.28 4445.74 4215.49 4154.34 4043.70 3923.24 3781.49 3788.83 3876.67 3723.37 3386.44 3058.44 3125.71 3298.84 3437.42 3283.92 Finished state with secondary load (KN) 6306.09 6030.30 6034.56 5492.10 5258.03 5190.89 5067.75 4926.98 4755.59 4616.69 4661.55 4455.54 4097.68 3708.32 3704.75 3789.07 3825.63 3562.30
Cable No. L20' L19' L18' L17' L16' L15' L14' L13' L12' L11' L10' L9' L8' L7' L6' L5' L4' L3'
Cable No. H20 H19 H18 H17 H16 H15 H14 H13 H12 H11 H10 H9 H8 H7 H6 H5 H4 H3
Page 43
4272.33 5356.60 4473.03 3974.56 4472.52 4213.96 4269.11 4332.17 4257.89 5637.28 5785.66 5894.02 5595.46 5695.66 5740.18 5766.29 5912.61 5621.12 5418.41 5605.90 5301.74 5399.12 5678.04 7074.72 6687.31 7124.86 7247.07 6993.28 7105.23 7254.65 6662.30 6787.68 7707.26 8147.28 8240.40
Page 44
Figure 3.14 Stresses at the upper flange of tower and girder on dead load at completed stage
Figure 3.15 Stresses at the lower edge of tower and girder on dead load at completed stage
Figure 3.17 Structure displacement on dead load at completed stage (unit: cm)
Page 45
Table 3.8 Cable forces and stresses on dead load at completed stage with creep and shrinkage of 10 years concrete
Cable L20' L19' L18' L17' L16' L15' L14' L13' L12' L11' L10' L9' L8' L7' L6' L5' L4' L3' L2' L1' L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L6 L7 L8 L9 L10 L11 L12 L13 L14 L15 L16 Force (kN) 7075.20 8109.76 7580.27 7019.21 7220.52 7125.43 6856.72 6553.24 5993.42 6037.85 5533.51 5666.11 5538.85 5567.00 5394.25 5087.19 4494.54 4355.53 4215.80 4511.62 4947.73 4530.24 4261.73 4423.21 5029.28 5214.00 5308.58 5386.58 5574.83 5380.35 5778.37 5892.89 6226.23 6438.70 6507.25 6441.88 Stress (MPa) 485.10 556.00 519.70 481.20 495.00 488.50 591.90 565.70 517.40 521.20 568.30 581.90 568.90 571.80 628.60 592.80 523.70 507.50 491.20 525.70 508.20 527.90 496.60 515.40 586.00 607.60 618.60 553.20 572.60 552.60 593.50 508.70 537.50 555.80 561.80 556.10 Cable L17 L18 L19 L20 H33 H32 H31 H30 H29 H28 H27 H26 H25 H24 H23 H22 H21 H20 H19 H18 H17 H16 H15 H14 H13 H12 H11 H10 H9 H8 H7 H6 H5 H4 H3 H2 Force (kN) 6339.91 6331.70 6758.13 5288.20 4268.37 5731.24 5835.47 5865.35 6178.50 6340.05 6479.12 6599.58 6629.67 6648.87 6370.02 6390.73 6704.08 6293.46 6020.36 6028.02 5489.04 5258.20 5193.98 5073.98 4935.43 4765.44 4626.12 4671.33 4465.45 4105.99 3715.55 3709.31 3787.46 3812.92 3534.32 4226.26 Stress (MPa) 547.30 546.60 583.40 456.50 368.50 494.80 503.80 506.30 533.40 547.30 559.30 569.70 572.30 574.00 549.90 551.70 578.70 543.30 519.70 520.40 563.80 540.00 533.40 521.10 506.90 489.40 539.00 544.30 520.30 570.50 516.30 515.40 526.30 529.80 491.10 587.30 Cable H1 H1' H2' H3' H4' H5' H6' H7' H8' H9' H10' H11' H12' H13' H14' H15' H16' H17' H18' H19' H20' H21' H22' H23' H24' H25' H26' H27' H28' H29' H30' H31' H32' H33' Force (kN) 5264.10 4361.77 3890.72 4399.16 4150.61 4204.60 4277.60 4212.24 5599.69 5755.57 5871.00 5576.88 5683.82 5734.67 5766.08 5916.77 5628.39 5427.55 5615.68 5311.04 5406.94 5684.64 7078.07 6687.26 7121.76 7241.44 6985.70 7094.06 7242.62 6650.32 6776.31 7696.55 8136.52 8230.56 Stress (MPa) 540.70 508.20 540.60 611.30 576.70 489.90 498.40 490.80 652.50 670.70 684.10 572.80 583.80 589.00 592.20 607.70 578.10 557.40 576.80 545.50 555.30 490.70 611.00 577.30 614.80 625.10 603.10 486.40 496.60 456.00 464.60 527.70 502.20 508.00
(2)-Live Load effects (Pedestrian load and vehicle load-City A) The live load effects on different layers of the structure were obtained by adding the maximum effects from various the moving live load (truck) cases.
Page 46
Figure 3.18 Stresses at the upper flange of tower and girder on live load at completed stage
Figure 3.19 Stresses at upper flange of tower and girder on dead and live load at completed stage
As the both figures show, the maximum tensile stress of the edge of the main beam under live load is 5.25MPa and the maximum compressive stress 4.71MPa. The maximum tensile stress at the edge of girder under dead and live load is 1.02MPa while the maximum compressive stress is 16.05MPa. The maximum tensile stress appears in place near the cross-bearing. Therefore, the two sides across the main beam near the riverbank edge should be supplemented with some of the pre-stressing tendons.
Page 47
The maximum amplitude of cable stress under live load (City A + pedestrian) is 80.66MPA and the minimum is -13.79MPA, which are both less than 200MPa in specification. (B)- Displacement
Page 48
Figure 3.24 Action of the main beam displacement under live load (Pedestrian+ City A)
From the Figures ( 21 to 24 ), the girder stiffness under the live load (pedestrian + city A) is =33.42/34000=1/1017.4 < 1/500, which can meets the specification. (C)- Distributed effects under all kinds of load
Table 3.9 Most unfavorable stress in control section under all kinds of loads (unit: MPa)
Section position City-A pedestrian Finished state Overall T increase Overall T decrease Sun shine T increase Sunshine T decrease Wind load current water loading ship's impact force
Max
Left girder upper section of LT Left girder lower section of LT Right girder Upper section of LT Right girder lower section of LT Left point of upper section of LT Right point of upper section of LT Left point of lower section of LT Right point of lower section of LT left girder Upper section of HT 2.51
Min
-1.66 0.00 -4.78 -0.58 0.59 -1.07 0.52 0.66 -0.07 -0.09
1.16
-3.12
-0.14
-6.70
1.06
-1.08
0.65
-0.32
-0.25
0.03
0.01
2.34
-1.29
0.34
-4.53
0.77
-0.79
-0.83
0.40
0.98
-0.05
-0.08
0.77
-3.36
-0.77
-7.18
-1.64
1.67
0.20
-0.10
-0.37
0.02
0.07
0.79
-2.06
-0.47
-10.30
-1.48
1.51
-0.16
0.08
1.34
0.00
0.03
1.24
-0.94
0.23
-10.30
1.66
-1.69
0.17
-0.08
-1.34
0.00
-0.03
3.32
-4.25
-0.57
-7.58
-1.56
1.59
-0.26
0.13
0.82
0.00
-0.04
3.66
-3.53
0.38
-6.26
1.61
-1.64
0.27
-0.13
-0.82
0.00
0.04
2.07
-1.07
0.32
-6.56
0.48
-0.49
-0.86
0.41
1.02
-0.03
0.01
Page 49
0.02
2.21
-1.82
0.00
-3.82
-0.13
0.13
-1.03
0.50
0.48
-0.07
-0.03
1.42
-2.57
-0.15
-10.7
0.27
-0.27
0.48
-0.24
-0.18
0.03
0.01
1.58
0.96
0.27
-6.76
0.94
-0.96
0.14
-0.07
3.09
0.00
-0.01
-1.11
-2.12
-0.46
-12.3
-0.85
0.87
-0.13
0.06
-3.09
0.00
0.01
3.16
-2.84
0.28
-9.69
0.62
-0.63
0.15
-0.07
1.56
0.00
0.03
2.65
-3.78
-0.53
-11.70
-0.58
0.59
-0.14
0.07
-1.56
0.00
-0.03
2.26
-2.04
0.18
-9.14
3.71
-3.78
0.35
-0.17
3.17
0.49
0.53
1.86
-2.71
-0.35
-5.86
-3.66
3.73
-0.34
0.17
-3.17
-0.49
-0.53
Left section of HT bottom Right section of HT bottom Key seg. Upper point in mid-span Lower point of key seg. in mid-span
1.30
-1.43
-0.14
-6.52
-2.10
2.14
-0.18
0.09
3.31
0.50
0.28
1.21
-1.56
-0.01
-8.92
2.13
-2.17
0.19
-0.09
-3.31
-0.50
-0.28
0.80
-1.84
-0.24
-5.69
-0.40
0.41
-0.54
0.26
-1.58
-0.05
-0.03
3.19
-0.94
0.45
-6.46
-0.12
0.12
0.54
-0.27
0.59
0.02
0.06
Page 50
Dead load+ City-A++ overall temperature increase+ pedestrian+ sunshine negative temperature difference Dead load+ City-A+ pedestrian+ + overall temperature decrease + sunshine temperature difference Dead load+ City-A++ overall temperature decrease+ pedestrian+ sunshine negative temperature difference Dead load + wind load Dead load + wind load+ current water load Dead load + ship's impact force
Table 3.11 Most unfavorable stress in control section under the load combination above (unit: MPa)
Load
Combination I
Combination II
Combination III
Combination IV
max
Upper section of left girder in LT Lower section of left girder in LT Upper section of right girder in LT Lower section of right girder in LT
min
max
min
max
min
max
min
-2.27
-6.44
-2.85
-7.02
-1.68
-5.85
-3.92
-8.09
-5.68
-9.96
-4.62
-8.90
-6.76
-11.04
-3.97
-8.25
-1.85
-5.48
-1.08
-4.71
-2.63
-6.26
-1.91
-5.54
-7.18
-11.31
-8.82
-12.95
-5.51
-9.64
-8.62
-12.75
Left HT section in LT
-9.98
-12.83
-11.46
-14.31
-8.47
-11.32
-11.62
-14.47
Right HT section in LT
-8.83
-11.01
-7.17
-9.35
-10.52
-12.70
-7.01
-9.19
left HT section in LT
-4.83
-12.40
-6.39
-13.96
-3.24
-10.81
-6.65
-14.22
Right LT section in LT Upper section of left girder in HT lower section of left girder in HT Upper section of right girder in HT
-2.22
-9.41
-0.61
-7.80
-3.86
-11.05
-0.34
-7.53
-4.17
-7.31
-3.69
-6.83
-4.66
-7.80
-4.55
-7.69
-6.85
-10.56
-7.89
-11.60
-5.79
-9.50
-7.71
-11.43
-1.61
-5.64
-1.74
-5.77
-1.48
-5.51
-2.77
-6.80
Page 51
-9.43
-13.42
-9.17
-13.16
-9.70
-13.69
-8.68
-12.67
-4.91
-5.54
-3.97
-4.60
-5.87
-6.50
-3.84
-4.46
-13.87
-14.88
-14.72
-15.73
-13.00
-14.01
-14.85
-15.86
Left LT section in HT
-6.25
-12.25
-5.63
-11.63
-6.88
-12.88
-5.47
-11.47
right LT section in HT
-9.58
-16.01
-10.16
-16.59
-8.99
-15.42
-10.30
-16.73
-6.71
-11.01
-3.00
-7.30
-10.49
-14.79
-2.64
-6.94
-4.35
-8.92
-8.01
-12.58
-0.62
-5.19
-8.35
-12.92
Left HT bottom section Right HT bottom section Upper section of key seg. in mid-span
-5.36
-8.09
-7.46
-10.19
-3.22
-5.95
-7.64
-10.37
-7.72
-10.49
-5.59
-8.36
-9.89
-12.66
-5.40
-8.17
-5.13
-7.77
-5.53
-8.17
-4.72
-7.36
-6.07
-8.71
-2.82
-6.95
-2.94
-7.07
-2.70
-6.83
-2.40
-6.53
NEXT
Combination VIII Combination IX Combination X
Load
Combination V
Combination VI
Combination VII
max Upper section of left girder in LT Lower section of left girder in LT Upper section of right girder in LT Lower section of right girder in LT Left upper tower section in LT Right HT section in LT -2.33 -4.94 -0.68 -8.92 -11.38 -7.26
max -5.33 -11.36 -5.86 -9.74 -11.24 -12.79 -4.12 -6.95 -3.55 -7.55 -8.96 -11.64 -4.20 -6.92 -3.60 -7.53 -8.96 -11.64 -4.87 -6.69 -4.61 -7.11 -10.27 -10.33
Page 52
Left LT section in LT Right LT section in LT Upper section of left girder in HT Lower section of left girder in HT Upper section of right girder in HT Lower section of right girder in HT Left HT section in HT Right HT section in HT left LT section in HT Right LT section in HT Left LT bottom section Right LT bottom section Left HT bottom section Right HT bottom section Upper section of key seg. in mid-span Lower section of key seg. in mid-span
-6.27 -0.75 -3.28 -7.97 -1.24 -9.40 -4.04 -14.66 -5.70 -10.08 -3.17 -7.84 -7.37 -5.68
-13.84 -7.94 -6.42 -11.69 -5.27 -13.39 -4.66 -15.67 -11.70 -16.51 -7.47 -12.41 -10.10 -8.45
-3.50 -3.59 -5.52 -5.61 -2.51 -9.22 -5.74 -13.13 -6.73 -9.13 -10.13 -0.96 -3.40 -9.70
-11.07 -10.78 -8.66 -9.33 -6.54 -13.21 -6.36 -14.14 -12.73 -15.56 -14.43 -5.53 -6.13 -12.47
-3.12 -4.00 -4.25 -5.87 -0.99 -9.94 -5.94 -12.93 -6.95 -8.92 -10.66 -0.45 -3.13 -9.98
-10.69 -11.19 -7.39 -9.59 -5.02 -13.93 -6.56 -13.94 -12.95 -15.35 -14.96 -5.02 -5.86 -12.75
-6.76 -7.08 -5.54 -7.19 -3.34 -10.88 -3.67 -15.39 -8.13 -13.26 -5.97 -9.03 -3.21 -12.23
-6.76 -7.08 -5.57 -7.18 -3.41 -10.86 -3.67 -15.39 -8.13 -13.26 -5.48 -9.52 -2.71 -12.73
-7.62 -6.22 -6.55 -6.79 -3.85 -10.70 -6.77 -12.29 -9.66 -11.73 -8.61 -6.39 -6.24 -9.20
-5.27 -3.20
-7.92 -7.34
-5.26 -2.16
-7.90 -6.29
-4.46 -2.97
-7.11 -7.10
-7.27 -5.87
-7.32 -5.85
-5.72 -6.40
Page 53
Figure 3.25 Stress envelope in the structure upper edge under ultimate limit state
Figure 3.26 Stress envelope in the structure lower edge under ultimate limit state
Page 54
The Figure 3.25 shows that the maximum tensile and compression stress of the main beam upper edge under ultimate limit state are respectively 1.28 and 19.31MPa in the side supporting position and the mid-span key segment.
' The tensile and compression stress are less than 1.15 ftk = 1.15 2.65 = 3.05 MPa ' and 0.70 fck = 0.7 32.4 = 22.68MPa.
For the Figure 3.26, the maximum tensile and compression stress of the main beam lower edge under ultimate limit state are 4.34 and 22.59MPa in the side supporting position and the joint area of tower and girder.
' The tensile stress is bigger than 1.15 ftk = 1.15 2.65 = 3.05MPa (specification).
Therefore, the side supporting area should be appropriate reinforcement. The maximum tensile stress of all cable is 849.00MPA in the short side of the tower, particulary the cable No.L6 ' and the maximum deformation of the main span is -79.32cm, which is a compressed stress. (2)-Serviceability Limit states The structure adequacy has been check out to know the bridge acceptable performance.
Figure 3.29 Stress envelope in the structure upper edge under serviceability limit state
Figure 3.30 Stress envelope in the structure lower edge under serviceability limit state
Page 55
As the Figure 3.29 shows, the maximum tensile and compression stress of the main beam upper edge under ultimate limit state are respectively 0.12 and 17.38 MPa in side supporting position and the mid-span key segment. The Figure3.30 shows that the maximum tensile and compression stress of the main beam lower edge under ultimate limit state are respectively 2.47 and 16.65 MPa in side supporting position and the joint area of tower and girder. All the tensile and compression stress are less than
' ' 1.15 ftk = 1.15 2.65 = 3.05MPa and 0.70 fck = 0.7 32.4 = 22.68MPa in specifi-
cation respectively. The maximum tensile stress of all cable is 756.93MPA in the short side of the tower, particulary the cable No.L6 ' and the maximum deformation of the main span is -39.25cm.
Page 56
3.4.1 Bridge stability analysis (A)- Stability analysis of maximum double cantilever state
The bridge stability problem is an important research in the CSB structure completion. In this work, we have considered the partial load on the completion bridge as the influence of stability. The stable performance of the bridge as the calculation of the load condition is divided into the following conditions (standard load combination): Load condition: self-weight under maximum double cantilever state + vertical wind load x load factor. In the above load conditions, the calculation of the whole bridge first-order stability coefficient results have been showed, see Table 3.12. The bridge first five buckling modes are plotted in the below Figure.3.33.
Table 3.12 Five first-order condition stable coefficient results
Mode 1 2 3 4 5 Stability factor 11.71 26.35 34.02 34.57 36.00 Instability modes (buckling modal) Higher tower Beam lateral bending Higher Tower longitudinal bending and beam longitudinal shifting Lower tower Beam lateral bending Higher tower Beam lateral bending Higher Tower longitudinal bending and beam longitudinal bending
In this load combination, if buckling occur, the load on the deck will be the value of secondary dead load multiplied by the factor. The following diagrams are the first five modes.
(a)
(b)
Page 57
(e)
Figure 3.33 Configuration of first five buckling mode (a)Lateral deformation of higher tower; (b)Main beam vertical 1st order; (c)Main beam vertical 2nd order; (d)Main beam vertical 3rd order, tower longitudinal 2nd order; (e)Main cross-vertical 3rd order, tower longitudinal 2nd order.
The bridge first five orders buckling modes are different; see Table 3.12. And the first-order buckling mode of the main tower shows the main tower cross-bending with stability factor of 11.71. The stiffness of the main tower is enough for the safety of construction, and the second-order buckling stability factor for the main beam is 26.35, which shows its stiffness is larger. (B)-Stability analysis of operational status Longitudinal direction is the critical direction of the bridge tower in the terms of stability. The results from the above analysis show that the wind load transverse effect and bridge tower lateral stiffness is relatively small. The first-order instability shows the bridge tower lateral instability. The minimum stability coefficient is 11.71, greater than the standard specification requirement which is 4 . Load condition: Weight + constant + live load. The analysis of the first five maximum dual suspension the buckling modes.
Page 58
Higher tower longitudinal bending and beam longitudinal shifting Higher tower longitudinal bending and beam vertical bending in higher tower mid-span Higher and lower tower longitudinal bending and beam vertical bending mid-span lower tower lateral bending and beam lateral shifting
4 5
31.40 32.68
We can note that the concern in engineering is the lowest eigenvalue or minimum safety factor of the bridge stability. The bridge first instability/buckling is the towerbeam cross bending, mainly for the higher tower. Therefore, the unfavorable live-load distribution is to make the top of high tower occur lateral deformation.
(a) (b)
(c)
(d)
Page 59
Figure 3.34 Configuration of the first five instability modes diagram (a) 1st mode; (b) 2nd mode; (c) 3rd mode; (d) 4th mode; (e) 5th mode
Based on the analysis of the construction operational stages, the maximum double cantilever state, considering the vertical wind and construction loads, the first order buckling mode is the main tower transverse bending, with stability factor 11.71. In the operational phase, the live load is placed on the most unfavorable position on the bridge, and the bridge stability factor is 13.38. From the above analysis, it can be seen that the bridge is stable and difficult to have instability problem.
3.5 SUMMARY
In this chapter, the process of building the Long-Span Cable-Stayed Bridge with Unequal Height of Pylons has been systematically laid out. Furthermore, briefly introduces the double pylon cable-stayed bridge for asymmetric finite element simulation thought and method. We also establish the bridge three dimensional space finite element analysis model for constant load under the action of the bridge as the state is analyzed, a process through which we attached proportional importance to different bridge features and bridge cases.
Page 60
continuous elastomeric for discretization (classification element), element between themselves only in a limited nodes must be connected to each other. With static problems, using the FE model to analyze dynamic problems is first to divide the structure into several element. And then, each element based on selected simple function combination as a displacement model, the force of inertia (d 'Alemberts principle), using the principle of virtual work unit to set up the equation of motion. Using FE method to analyze dynamic problems in general steps are as follows:
Page 61
In the dynamic analysis introduction of the time coordinate, the discrete method and static analysis are the same. The select element displacement functions at any point in the element ( x , y ) displacement u, v interpolation can be express as:
u ( x, y, t) =
(4.1)
N i ( x , y )u i (t )
i =1
( x, y, t) =
(4.2)
N i ( x , y )vi (t )
i =1
The meaning in static analysis are the same, but the element displacement and node displacement are function of time t. Using the principle of virtual work (variation principle), derived element equation of motion, which formed the resistance matrix and stiffness matrix. Each element characteristics matrix form the discrete structure of the mass, damping and stiffness matrix. Establish for the discrete structure the whole motion differential equations which can obtains each displacement node { x ( t )} and strain { ( t )} and stress { ( t )} . A structural total element is NE , the number of DOF for a total of N (which is, the basic unknown quantity of total number). Where x ( t ) , x ( t ) and x ( t ) are respectively the vectors of the displacements, velocities, accelerations array node and calculated the
} {
[ K ] is the structure stiffness matrix which is N N order matrix. Each element stiffness matrix [ K ]( e) expansion for N N order matrix, then for all the [ K ]( e ) phase superposition we can get the structure stiffness matrix as :
[ K ] = [ K ]
e =1
NE
( e)
(4.3)
Are superimposed in accordance with the same method can be the quality of all cells in the matrix [ M ]( e) , damping matrix [C ]( e ) , structure mass matrix [ M ] and damping matrix
[C ] :
Page 62 (4.4)
[M ] = [M ]
e =1
NE
(e)
[C ] = [ C ]
e =1
NE
(e)
(4.5)
Similar for the dynamic load of each element to form the equivalent nodal loads
{PEP ( t )}(
e)
(4.6)
The inertial and damping forces also acts as the load and the total load vector is: (4.7)
( t )} [ K ]{ x ( t )} = {P ( t )} [M ]{ x ( t )} [C]{ x
(4.8)
From the Eq.(4.8) we can get the standard equation of motion of the discrete structure, which used the FE method to solve the basic equations of the dynamic problem of the elastomeric [23].
( t )} + K ]{ x ( t )} {P ( t )} = [M ]{ x ( t )} + [C]{ x
(4.9)
Where K, C and M are respectively matrices that describe the spring stiffness, damping constant and the mass of the structure. P(t) is an external force (dynamic loads) vector, and x is a nodal displacement vector. Moreover, K and M are greater than zero for a physical system. The above equation is { x ( t )} order constant coefficient differential equations and its FE method generally experienced problems of linear algebraic equations. Then the static and dynamic problems form a mass matrix and damping matrix. In overall, a system with n DOF has mass, damping, and stiffness matrices of size n n , and n natural frequencies
[40]
structure described by Eq.(4.9) will have n natural frequencies. Each natural frequency n has an associated mode shape vector, n which describes the deformation of the structure when the system is vibrating at each associated natural frequency.
Page 63
4.1.1 FE method for solving natural vibration frequencies and mode shapes
In practical engineering problems, the damping is very small. The impact on the structure of the natural frequencies, mode shapes and seeking natural vibration frequencies and mode shapes generally do not consider the impact of structural damping ratio. To get the equation of movement of an undamped system with n DOF in free oscillation, [C] and {P (t)} must be equal to zero in the above equation of motion (Eq.(4.9)). By substituting P=0 and C=0, the eq.(4.9) becomes (the free undamped vibration);
x ( t )} + [ K ]{ x ( t )} = {0} [ M ]{
displacement can be expressed as:
(4.10)
For linear system, the simple harmonic motion of each node in the free vibration
{x ( t )} = {x } sin ( wt + )
0
(4.11)
Expression in which { x0} characterize the deformation of the mode, w the circular frequencies, the phase. Combining the two equations above gives:
2 n x ( t )} sin (n ( t ) + ) + [ K ]{ x ( t )} sin (n ( t ) + ) = {0} [ M ]{
(4.12)
Wherein { x0} for each node in the amplitude of the array, it is a function of the node coordinates, and has nothing to do with the time t , quency, j is the phase angle. This expression can be simplified by divided by the theme sin ( wt + ) and has to be verified at any time.
([ K ] [ M ]){ x} = {0}
2 n
(4.13)
Structure in free vibration amplitude of each node { x0} cannot all be zero, the eq. (4.14) coefficient determinant must be equal to zero, i.e. for a non-trial solution, the resulting structure frequency equation ;
[ K ] + n [ M ] = 0
Where n = n ; for the structure,
2
n
(4.14)
mass matrix are n-order square (n order matrixes). The above equation is about algebraic equations natural frequency of the structure, which can be solved.
Page 64
For the natural frequencies i ( i = 1,2,, ) , by the eq. (4.14), can be determined a set of amplitude values for each node { x0 }i , between them to maintain a fixed ratio of the absolute value but can be changed, and use them to form a vector, oscillation frequency corresponding the modes. When structural DOF n is large, solving
2 n of the n-order equation is very difficult.
of the self-
This problem can be attributed to an eigenvalue problem in the eq.(4.14) is rewritten as:
[ K ]{ x0} = n2 [ M ]{ x0 }
For a given [ K ] and [ M] are seeking to meet on the number
(4.15)
2 n and non-zero vec-
tor { x0} . This problem is known as the generalized eigenvalue problem whose solutions are the eigenvalues, i and the corresponding vectors i that many computer methods can be selected on this issue. In overall, the eigenvalues represent the system
( =
i
mode shapes.
Page 65
China's seismic design specification used the theory to determine the earthquake response spectrum. According to the records of earthquake ground motion measured; calculate the theoretical acceleration response spectrum analysis drawn to determine the seismic effect. If we figure out the structure of the natural vibration period, that can use the acceleration response spectrum curve to determine the structure of the maximum response acceleration, and then find out the earthquake response. The Midas program using the modal response spectrum method is the application of the modes orthogonal decomposition principles and modes. The structure of mutual coupling of multiple DOF motion differential equations into several independent differential equations, thereby solving the structural seismic response of multi DOF decomposition for solving a number of single DOF structural seismic equations. For the response spectrum theory, the use of single DOF structure obtained for every vibration mode after the largest earthquake response, they are combined, and you can get the seismic response of multi DOF.
characteristics are a reflection of the structural characteristics and depend on the structure material properties, stiffness, quality and their distribution pattern. The problem often encountered when carrying out structural analysis and engineering design analysis is especially based on the size of the structure as well as the various parts of the stiffness, mass computational structural vibration characteristics. From the vibration characteristics of the bridge structure parameters including natural frequencies, mode shapes and damping ratio can reflect the dynamic performance of the bridge itself. Related to Figure3.6, we use Midas program procedures of the full bridge structure to do its model analysis .i.e., solving the structural dynamic characteristics. As the result shows, we have got the vibration mode serial number, frequencies, cycle, the vibration mode characteristics and values at the final stage of the former ten orders as depict in Table 4.1 and Figure 4.1.
Page 66
3.873194 2.884297 2.505617 2.284523 1.630098 1.400172 1.213272 1.147597 0.932285 0.720545
2nd mode
3rd mode
4th mode
Page 67
6th mode
8th mode
9th mode
10th mode
Its can be seen that, the dynamic characteristic of the well-established methods of cable Structure Bridge are the following three vibration modes: anti-symmetrical floating, 1st order symmetrical vertical bending and the 1st order symmetrical torsion vibrations modes. The structure 1st vibration mode is the essential vibration mode to vehicle vibration response, but the first two vibration modes are very significant to seismic response and the latter two vibration modes are significant to wind vibration. According to the Table 4.1, the bridge natural vibration characteristic is described as the following:
Page 68
The fundamental frequency of the asymmetric single plane CSB with unequal high of towers is 0.258185 Hz and the correspondent fundamental period is 3.873194 secondes. Therefore, the stiffness index is relatively larger and the dynamic issues in the design of this bridge should be emphasized or stressed. The 1st and 2nd vibration modes are the symmetrical and the anti-symmetrical lateral vibration mode of the main tower, which contribute most to the tower lateral seismic response. The cycle 0.399103 of the main girder 1st order symmetrical vertical bending is 2.505617s. This value has a huge effect on the CSB seismic response and wind resistant stability. An overall, the right deal between the bridge measured and computed results must verifies its accuracy and the rationality. As can be seen from the above analysis, structural dynamic characteristics of the bridge have met the specification requirements, has great rigidity/stiffness. The Wujiang Bridge has a single cable plane in the centre line.
Page 69
(1) 1.0 gravity (dead load) +1.0 early prestressed +1.0, cable force+1.0x-dir+0.3y-dir+0.3z-dir (2) 1.0 gravity (dead load) +1.0 early prestressed +1.0, cable force+0.3x-dir+1.0y-dir+0.3z-dir (3) 1.0 gravity (dead load) +1.0 early prestressed +1.0, cable force+0.3x-dir+0.3y-dir+1.0z-dir
We work here in two dimensions, so the y direction is equal to zero. The Wujiang River Bridge finite element is created by Midas which is 3D geotechnical software. The displacement of towers top in XYZ directions under combination and Stresses in Junction Point of pier and girder of tower1 and tower2 under combination load. Based on the above load combination, the main beam in the earthquake under the most adverse stress are depicting in the following figures.
We do the elastic response spectrum vibration mode analysis to get the effective modal participation mass ratio in order to identify the important vibration modes. With proper and reasonable time-integration step, we also get the first 50 order cycles and effective modal participation mass ratios of Wujiang Bridge; see Table 5-2.
Table 4.2 First 50 order cycles and effective converted vibration mass ratio
Modal No.
TRAN-Y (rad/sec)
26.63 0 25.75 0 1.84 0 12.66 0 0 10.03 26.63 26.63 52.38 52.38 54.22 54.22 66.88 66.88 66.88 76.9
TRAN-Z (cycle/sec)
0 0.53 0 4.56 0 2.89 0 18.7 2.65 0
Sum (%)
0 50.09 50.09 74.36 74.36 88.34 88.34 88.39 88.47 88.47
Mass (%)
0 0.53 0.53 5.1 5.1 7.98 7.98 26.69 29.34 29.34
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1.622223 2.178282 2.50764 2.750175 3.854484 4.48693 5.178709 5.474692 6.738461 7.453813
Page 70
43.35 43.35 44.62 44.65 44.65 45.88 48.57 48.59 48.59 48.62 48.77 48.77 48.86 49.03 53.11 55.47 55.47 55.52 55.52 55.52 55.95 56.42 64.56 64.56 65.33 65.78 71.62 72.44 79.36 79.38 80.91 81.12 81.17 81.37 84.16 86.36 86.42 86.55 86.59 86.82
Page 71
As conclusion, the among of first 50 vibration modes of this bridge, the 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11 and 15 modes contributed a big participation of the mass. The first 14 vibration modes takes more than 90% of the total mass along the bridge, while the first 50 vibration modes did not exceed 90% of the total mass in the transverse direction and the longitudinal component. The response spectrum mode superposition method in this research adopts the first 50 orders vibration modes.
Figure 4.3 Stress of the bridge upper edge under load combination I The structure main beam edge appears tensile stresses under the load combination I. The maximum tensile stress on the upper edge is 0.07MPa in the main beam side cross-bearing point, and the maximum compressive stress is 12.80MPa in the cross-tower side point.
Figure 4.4 Stress of the bridge lower edge under load combination I
The structure main beam edge appears tensile stresses under the load combination I. The maximum tensile stress on the lower edge is 0.22MPa in the main beam side cross-bearing point, and the maximum compressive stress is 14.00MPa in the joint area of tower and girder.
Page 72
Figure 4.5 Stress of the bridge upper edge under load combination II
The structure main beam edge appears tensile stresses under the load combination II. The maximum tensile stress on the lower edge is 0.07MPa in the main beam side cross-bearing point, and the maximum compressive stress is 12.38MPa in the mid side area of higher tower.
Figure 4.6 Stress of the bridge lower edge under load combination II
The structure main beam edge appears tensile stresses under the load combination II. The maximum tensile stress on the lower edge is 0.21 MPa in the main beam side cross-bearing point, and the maximum compressive stress is 14.22 MPa in the joint area of tower and girder.
Figure 4.7 Stress of the bridge upper edge under load combination III
The structure main beam edge appears tensile stresses under the load combina-
Page 73
tion III. The maximum tensile stress on the lower edge is 0.07MPa in the main beam side cross-bearing point, and the maximum compressive stress is 12.93MPa in the mid-span side point of higher tower.
Figure 4.8 Stress of the bridge lower edge under load combination III
The structure main beam edge appears tensile stresses under the load combination III. The maximum tensile stress on the lower edge is 0.22MPa in the main beam side cross-bearing point, and the maximum compressive stress is 14.08MPa in the joint area of tower and girder.
Page 74
Conclusion, it can be seen from the above that the maximum tensile stress on the upper and lower of this bridge structure were 0.07Mpa and 0.22MPa under the three combinations load conditions, which are less than the allowable tensile stress of concrete C60. Based on the above analysis of the bridge under seismic action, the full-bridge stresses are within the acceptable range, which shows that its seismic performance is better.
4.3
SUMMARY
The FE simulation analysis of vibration characteristics of the height and low-
tower cable-stayed bridge such as wind, earthquake has completely analyzed. The structure of the various modes, frequencies and seismic check results and their results show that the bridge structural dynamic performance meet the regulatory requirements and has a good safety reserves in the role of wind and seismic.
Page 75
5.1 CONCLUSIONS
For the first time, build a model is an iterative, which requires the structural designer to be more patient, objective and domain-based decisions in order to fine-tune the model which can take account all their priorities. The CSB due to its remarkable ability to strides and its great landscape effect has been widely used in the world in recent years. At the same time as the technology continues to advance, cable-stayed bridge in the aspects of design and construction of the further improvement and development. The majority of scholars and CSB Engineers have done some researches which made a lot of results in the domain. But in term of the asymmetric cables-stayed bridge with unequal height of pylons its not too much, and mostly seems concentrated on the traditional towers with equal height of pylons. This paper summarizes the state of research in China as well as abroad as a kind of rare structure, and requires further extensions for its construction. Aerodynamics and seismic are the two significant dynamic loads that have to be consider in the design of CSB with unequal height of pylons. Asymmetrical PC cable-stayed bridge with the unequal height of pylons, Second Fuling Wujiang River Bridge as engineering background, its FE modeling analysis, including the fullbridge structural analysis which bring us to the following main conclusions: The vertical main tower of RC structures, resistance to the ultimate limit state and the deformation satisfy the specifications of the existing road; The main PC beam as members of prestressed concrete limit state in the cross section, the concrete beam analysis and stress analysis of the construction phase of the calculation of the strain, the strength and deformation analysis of the ultimate limit state meet the requirements of the existing roadway requirements; The cable maximum stress is less than the allowable stress, the maximum stress magnitude meeting the requirements;
Page 76
Bridge phase full-bridge most unfavorable first-order stability factor of 11.71 is greater than the specification value; The maximum stress of the cable is less than the allowable stress and the maximum stress amplitude, less than 200 MPa of the regulatory requirements; The upper structure under seismic loads has a sufficient safety; In other hand, the Second Fuling Wujiang River Bridge finite element analysis, structural behavior meets the current specification requirements, and can be valuable experience for similar projects. However, the outcome of this investigation cannot represent the situation of all construction processes in cables-stayed bridge type.
Page 77
REFERENCES
1 Hopkins, H. J., A Span of Bridges: An Illustrated History.New York and Washington., Pracger 1970 2 Kavanagh, T. C., Discussion of Historical Developments of Cable-Stayed
Bridges by Podolny and Fleming, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol.99,No. ST7, Proc. Paper 9826. July 1973 3 4 5 6
Podolny, W. and scalzi, J.B. Construction and Design of Cable-Stayed Bridges, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1986 Troitsky, M.S., Cable-Stayed Bridges, Van Nostrand, Reinhold, New York, 1988
Troitsky M. C. Cable-stayed bridges. Crosby Lockwood Staples, London, 1977 Gimsing, N. J.: Cable Supported Bridges, Concept & Design. John Wiley & Sons.Chichester 1998
Leonhardt, F. and Zellner, W., Past, present and future of cable-stayed bridges, in Cable-Stayed Bridges, Recent Developments and Their Future, M. Ito et al., Eds., Elsevier Science Publishers, New York, 1991
Wenk, H.Die Stroemsundbruecke (The Stroemsund Bridge), Der Stahlbau, Vol. 23, No. 4, 7376, 1954
Feng, M. Technological challenges for bridge construction in china in the early 21st century, International Conference on Bridge Engineering-Challenges in the 21st Century, Hong Kong. 2006
10 X.X. Shi. Analysis on Dynamics Characteristics and Earthquake Response of Long-Span Cables-stayed Bridge. Dalian: Dalian Maritime University 2009 11 M. Como, A. Grimaldi, F. Maceri. Statical behaviour of long-span cable-stayed bridges Orignal Research Article. International J. of Solids and Structures, 21, l 8, 1985 12 Gimsing NJ. Suspended Bridges with Very Long Spans. International Conference on Cable-Stayed and Suspension Bridges. Deauville, France, 489-504, 1994.96 13 Abdel-Ghaffar AM, Nazmy AS. 3-D nonlinear seismic behavior of cable-stayed bridges. J Struct Engng ASCE; 117:34 56-76; 1991 14 Karoumi R. Dynamic response of cable-stayed bridges subjected to moving vehicles. Licentiate Thesis, TRITA-BKN Bulletin 22, Department of Structural Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm 1996
Page 78
15 Kanok-Nukulchai W, Yiu PKA, Brotton DM. Mathamatical modelling of cablestayed bridges. Struct Engng Int, 2: 108 13; 1992 16 Fleming JF, Egeseli EA. Dynamic behaviour of a cable-stayed bridge. Earthqu Engng Struct Dyn, 8: 1-16; 1980 17 Adeli H, Zhang J. Fully nonlinear analysis of composite girder cable-stayed bridges. Comput Struct, 54:267-77; 1995 18 T.G Zang. Software engineering. Beijing: science press, 2009 19 Karoumi R. Dynamic response of cable-stayed bridges subjected to moving vehicles. In: IABSE 15th Congress, Denmark, 87-92; 1996 20 Gimsing NJ (Technical University of Denmark), Tanaka H (Danish Maritime Institute), Esdahl S (COWI consult A/S). Personal communication, 1997 21 Zhong Qu, Yu Wu, Qun Liu, Bing Liu. Software engineering. Beijing: Mechanical Industry Press, 2007 22 Hurty,W. C. and M. F. Rubinstein. Dynamics of Structures, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1964 23 Microsoft Corp: http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2008/en/us/data-miningaddins.aspx; 2008 24 Jamie MacLennan, Ioan Bogdan Crivat, and ZhaoHui Tang,Data Mining with Microsoft SQL Server 2008, Indiana, United States of America: Wiley Publishing, Inc., 2009 25 Podolny, W. Jr. -. Scalzi, J.B.: Construction and Design of Cables-stayed bridges. John Wiley & Sons. New York, 1976 26 Walther R, Houriet B, Isler W, Moia P. Cables-stayed bridges. London: Thomas Telford, 1988. 27 Gimsing, N.J., Cable Supported Bridges - Concept and Design, 2nd edition, John Wiley & Sons, London, 1994 28 Mathivat, J.: The cantilever construction of prestressed concrete bridges. John Wiley & Sons. New York 1983 29 Petersen, C., Stahlbau - Grundlagen der Berechnung und Baulichen Ausbildung von Stahlbauten, 3rd edition, Vieweg , Wiesbaden 1993 30 Leonhardt F. and Zellner W. Cable-stayed bridges. International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering Surveys, S-13/80, February, 1980 31 Ito, M., Stay cable technology: Overview, IABSE Conference on cable-stayed bridges-Past, present and futurex, Malmo, Sweden, 1999.
Southwest Jiaotong University Master Degree Thesis 32 33 Menn, C.: Prestressed Concrete Bridges. Birkhuser Verlag, Basel 1990.
Page 79
Fleming J. F., Egeseli E. A. Dynamic behavior of a cable-stayed bridge. International Journal Earthquake Engineering Structure Dynamics, 8(1),1-16. 1980
34
Ernst, J.H., Der E-Modul von Seilen unter Bercksichtigung des Durchhanges, Der Bauingenieur,40(2), 52-55. 1965
35
Setra P., Cable stays-Recommendations of French interministerial commission on prestressing, Bagneux Cedex 2002
36
Virlogeux, M. Cable Vibrations in Cable-Stayed Bridges. Bridge Aerodynamics. Ed. Larsen and Esdahl. 213-233. 1998
37
Poser, M. The BBR Approach to Cable Vibration and Cable Damping. Report of BBR VT International Ltd. www.bbrnetwork.com. 2005
38
Ito, M. Stay Cable Technology: Overview. Proceedings of the 1999 IABSE Conference, Malmo, Sweden. 1999
39
40 Torrejon, V.E., Berman, D.W., Design of Rama VIII Bridge in Bangkok, Thai Engineering.com, [Online]. 41 Zhou, L. X. et al., Prestressed Concrete Cable-Stayed Bridges, Beijing Renming Jiaotong Press, 1989. 42 Tang, M.C. The 40-year evolution of cable-stayed bridges, in International Symposium on Cable-Stayed Bridges, Lin Yuanpei et al., Eds., Shanghai, 30 11,1994 43 Podolny, W. and Scalmi, J., Construction and Design of Cable-Stayed Bridges, John Wiley & Sons,New York, 1983 44 Virlogeux, M., Erection of cable-stayed bridges, Cable-stayed bridges-Recent developments and their future , Developments in Civil Engineering,40, ELSEVIER, 77-106, 1991 45 LEONHARDT, F., Developing Guidelines for Aesthetic Design, Bridge Aesthetics Around the World, National Research Council U.S., pp.3 46 Structural Engineering International, Bridge Across Rijeka Dubrovacka, Croatia, 190-192, 2003, 47 WALTHER, R. HOURIET, B. ISLER, W. MOIA, P. KELIN, J, F. Cable Stayed Bridges (second edition), Thomas Telford Publishing, 1999. 48 () JTJ 027-96.: 1999
Page 80
(JTJ 027-96.Code for design of specifications of highway cable stayed bridge. Beijing: Peoples Republic of China Ministry of transportation, 1999) 49 (JTGD 60-2004).: 2004 (JTG D60-2004. General design specification of Highway Bridge Beijing: Peoples Republic of China Ministry of transportation, 2004) 50 , JTG D622004. JTG D62-2004 the road reinforced concrete and prestressed concrete bridge design 51 ..:2002. 52 . [D].2006. 53 , JTJ025-86. (JTJ025-86. Code for design of steel structure and timber structure highway bridges and culverts)