Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
ABSTRACT: Two kinds of errors are frequently encountered during the construction of
cable-stayed bridges: one is force-application error in the jacking cable forces, and the
other is geometry error in controlling elevations of the girders. These errors are normally
kept within the prescribed tolerances by adjusting cable forces. However, the influence
of creep in prestressed concrete cable-stayed bridges cannot be ignored. If this influence
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
is not considered, it is possible to exceed the allowable stay-force range at the time when
creep ends. This paper presents an optimization application in which the influence of
creep can be taken into account. Some optimizing criteria are proposed, and the optimum
adjusting cable forces are obtained by minimizing the amount of work due to these forces.
Residual stresses due to force-application errors can also be minimized. The procedures
are illustrated by several examples.
INTRODUCTION
Since cable-stayed bridges, the structure of which relies primarily on the balancing of loads
by stay-cable forces, are quite flexible structures, geometry- and load-control errors during
construction can substantially affect the completed structures. Moreover, stress changes due to
creep, which can significantly change the stay-cable forces, should be taken into account in
concrete cable-stayed bridges.
In steel cable-stayed bridges, the determination of cable-force adjustments based on the
method employed for hanger cables of arch bridges has been reported (Fujisawa and Torno
1985). Since the objective function in this method is formulated as a simple objective function,
utilizing errors in cable forces and errors in camber, problems have been encountered in the
application of the method to actual bridges, as the two types of error are expressed in different
physical terms (Nonaka and Kawahito 1985).
On the other hand, methods have also been proposed for concrete cable-stayed bridges that
base the optimization technique on cable-force control (Yoshimura et al. 1987). However, in
these proposals, although the geometry error in controlling elevation of the girders was modified
during construction, the deflection after the completion of long-term creep has usually not been
considered in the optimization procedures for the determination of the cable-force adjustments.
This should be done in concrete cable-stayed bridges, which are greatly affected by creep.
In steel cable-stayed bridges, the force application errors in the jacking of cables, the geometry
errors in controlling elevations of the girders and the towers, the amount of adjustment, and
the number of cables to be adjusted are controlled during erection (Furukawa et al. 1986).
However, most concrete cable-stayed bridges are planned and detailed for an adjustment of
cable forces during or after erection, and decreasing or limiting the number of cables to be
adjusted should not be an absolute condition. The deflection of the girders, the towers, and the
cable forces can generally be controlled in concrete cable-stayed bridges.
A major difference between steel and concrete cable-stayed bridges is the influence of creep.
Generally, the cable forces decrease and the displacements restrained by the cable forces increase
while creep is in progress. Residual errors in cable forces will give rise to additional displacements
and cable-force changes due to creep. By making use of the creep characteristics of concrete
cable-sayed bridges, it is possible to achieve cable-force adjustments that cause less residual
long-term error. In spite of the fact that consideration of these characteristics is a prerequisite
for accurate control, no studies are known that consider creep in the control process.
The question of what should be the objective function for optimization when an accurate
control system is planned thus arises. In many steel cable-stayed bridges, the sum of the squares
of the amount of shim adjustment is taken as the main objective function, while the geometry
errors and the cable force errors are treated as constraints. Such a method gives good conver-
'Bridge Engr., Sumitomo Constr. Co., Ltd., 13-4 Araki-cho Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
2Bridge Engr., Sumitomo Conslr. Co., Ltd., 13-4 Araki-cho Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
'The Nasser I. AI-Rashid Chair in Civ. Engrg., Univ. of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712.
·Prof. of Civ. Engrg., Yamaguchi Univ., Tokiwadai, Ube, Yamaguchi 755, Japan.
Note. Associate Editor: H. Everett Drugge. Discussion open until September 1, 1995. To extend the closing
date one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript for this
paper was submitted for review and possible publication on November 13, 1991. This paper is part of the Journal
of Structural Engineering, Vol. 121, No.4, April, 1995. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9445/95/0004-0685-0694/$2.00 +
$.25 per page. Paper No. 2960.
summing up the work of each cable, the girders can be prevented from experiencing excessive
stresses during adjustment.
This paper will demonstrate the effectiveness of this method including the influence of creep,
also drawing comparisons with other objective functions previously employed.
Although there are other formulas for strain due to creep (Quast 1980; Rusch and Jungwirth
1976), (1) is equal to Trost's formula
(2)
substituting
1
p=--- (3)
1- e 4> <\>
The relaxation coefficient p and the second term of (2) includes strain due to both elastic
deflection and creep. Since this study aims to determine the adjusting cable force in order to
keep the error within tolerance at the time when creep ends, it is more important to understand
the quantitative performance after creep effectively ends, rather than the performance during
creep. Other desirable objectives are the taking into account of the influence of creep on
geometry and force control of concrete cable-stayed bridges, and confirmation of the effective-
ness of the minimum work criterion. For these reasons, (1), which gives a good approximation
of the final state, and is also easy to formulate, can be used in this study. Although some
researchers have noted that creep recovery should be considered in concrete cable-stayed bridges
(Hoshino and Saeki 1980), this influence can be taken into account by substituting
E
E=--' <\>'=~ (4a,b)
1 + <\>,' 1 + <\>,
in (1) (Inomata 1976). This means that creep recovery and elastic recovery occur at the same
time, as Rusch and Jungwirth (1976) have assumed.
Assuming that the creep coefficient of the cable is zero, and the creep coefficient of the girder
and tower is constant and identical, (1) can be transformed as follows to reflect the compatibility
conditions of the displacement at the attachment points of the cables:
where
P L = -G IDo (6)
The cable forces before creep occurs are the sum of Po and ~p,r. Thus (5) becomes
P~ = B(PL - Po - ~p,n(1 - e -4» = B(P L - Po)(l - e -4» - BaP,j(1 - e <l» (7a,b)
where
(8)
(10)
Then the diagonal matrix is defined as the influence matrix of the work
En 0 0 0
0 EE' 0 0
EJ: ( 16)
0 0 EEi 0
0 0 0 EJ:H
where
( 17)
Also. another diagonal matrix is defined as the influence matrix of the work due to external
forces
AE11T'1 0 0 0
0 Al:~2 T22 0 0
EEn ( 18)
0 0 AUiT;; 0
0 0 0 Af~'IIIIITflll
The same idea can be used in the case of the work due to creep.
Substituting a unit cable force for .:1P7, in (9) and (13), the influence matrix of cable force
and displacement due to creep is shown in (20). Thus, the diagonal matrix is defined as the
influence matrix of the work due to creep
E"" 0 0 0
0 E"" 0 0
E", = ( 19)
0 0 E(l>; 0
0 0 0 £.1)1/
(21)
• Criterion I: Minimizing the sum of the square of the adjusting tensioning forces of the
cable
• Criterion II: Minimizing the work due to the adjusting cable force
• Criterion III: Minimizing the work due to the adjusting cable force and creep
• Criterion IV: Minimizing the work due to the adjusting tensioning force of the cable
Criterion I is equal to the sum of the squares of the amount of shims; the others are the
optimization criteria proposed in this study. Criterion II minimizes the work before the start of
creep; criterion III minimizes the work including the influence due to creep; and criterion IV
minimizes the work due to external forces.
Criterion I
The sum of the squares of the adjusting tensioning forces of the cable is given by
(23)
Substituting (22) in (23)
Criterion II
The work due to the adjusting cable force is given by
(25a,b)
Criterion III
The work due to the adjusting cable force and creep is given by
VIII = (EEaPo)Tapo - {E<I>(TaPo + aPco)}T(TaPo + aP£1') (27a)
The minus of the term for creep change means that the sign of the work due to the adjusting
cable force is different from the work due to creep. Defining E as
(28)
and substituting (22) in (27)
VIII = ETAi,.TETAf::,.'E + (2&,iAi,.TETAi,.' - 2ap[oE;TA E,.')E
+ &,iAi,TETAi,.'&o - 2ap[oE;TAi,.'&o - ap[oE;ap co (29)
Criterion IV
The work due to the adjusting tensioning force of the cable is given by
V/V = (EE<"aPo)TaPo = ap,iEI<"aPo ~ min (30a,b)
(31b)
Since E includes only elastic deflection, the residual error of deflection after completion of creep
is given by
Er-;+", = E + A",T~P" = E + A",TAF,.'(8" + E) (32a,b)
It is clear that nonlinear programming methods are required, as these objective functions derive
quadratic equations for E.
[ '"
( f)
1---:",.....--::2~---,.
""
II: II:
c:
lJJ 9.0 ll]130
-I
<t ;;i 120
"
::J ::J
e 8.0 011.0 Criterion
en
lJJ
Ui
~
--- 1,n,fl' \
II: 10.0
-m I ~
7.0 9.0
SIS2 CO:'Pt~~~n SI S2 Completion
of Creop
ADJUSTMENT p ADJUSTMENT
(a)
10.0 15.0
II:
0 ~140
I\.
II:
e:i 9O
II:
e:i 13.0 "\.
Crllerlon Crilerlon
~
-I
<t
::J
98.0
en
---I
---I
-II
:g-112.0
911.0
en
_.- I
--. n
-m '" ~
lJJ
II:
7.0
--_. W
SI
ADJUSTMENT
S2 Complellon
of Creep
lJJ
II: 10.0
9.0
_··w
SIS2
ADJUSTMENT
'"
Compl.,lon
of Creep
lb)
(mml S CTion I
10.0
,
-" / lmm)
15.0
Section 2
II:
~ 14.0
--.::::: l\.
~,
0
II: II:
II: e:i 13.0
lJJ
-I
8.0
;;i 12.0
~
<t
::J ::J '\~
o 11.0 Criterion
~
lJJ
7.0 en
~ 100
_.- I, Rill ~
II: -m
9.0
6.0 SIS2 Completion
SI S2 Completion
of Creep ADJUSTMENT of Creep
ADJUSTMENT
Ie)
FIG. 2. Behavior of Two Cable Model with Adjustments and Creep: (a) Case 1; (b) Case 2; (c) Case 3
increase but within tolerance after completion of creep. Criteria I, II, and IV give identical
optimum solutions, and the errors in elevation of both points are active. With criterion III, only
point 2 is actively adjusted, and the residual errors in elevation and in cable forces are the
smallest among the four criteria.
Case 2 is the opposite of case 1 in terms of force application error direction. Since the direction
of the geometry error in elevation is in the same direction as that of the displacements due to
4_ 14000-56 50lil
51500 77500
(mm) (mm)
'- ---,
IIJ 0
I\~
, ,
, -,
... in• o
§ <1-10 I--"
""" t-L- ,
-10 ')10 /1: 6 ::l ~~\ /11 "-~
o
- -20
\~ WI ./ rTf o
i:j- 20 , ",
l:1 .
5.
1-- -- - - ' \
ilL.,. o
et: -30
l?'4 b- - 1-- L<~ ~-
~ ~J:~'
et: -30
-40
K ..
K K ~ K
(0)
Koi K7 K. K. KI
-40
KI K. K. K4 K.
(0)
K. K7 K. K. KI o
o Bofor. AdJuolmo.. 4 - . - - - - - - -
Before AdJusrmen':t=======
ComPI:i:o~enl
Complotlon of Crwp
_ ___ ~ Complek'iu~me~_±=_=_=_=_=_=_=_=_=_=
• Complotl... oICroep
Ib) Ibl
FIG. 4. Results Using Optimization Criterion I: (a) Elevation of FIG. 5. Results Using Optimization Criterion II: (a) Elevation
Girders; (b) Cable Forces (.1P~/POl) of Girders; (b) Cable Forces (.1P~/Po/)
adjusting cable forces, which tend to decrease the cable-force errors, the error is greater than
in case 1. In this case, a significant factor to be taken into account is the influences which increase
the cable force due to creep. The girder therefore deforms downward due to creep. Although
the four solutions are almost identical because of the severe conditions, the residual errors of
criterion III are smaller in comparison to the others.
In case 3, since the force application error of 52 is opposite to that of case 1,51 is detensioned
greatly to eliminate the force application error, and also to decrease the work due to creep using
criterion III. The residual errors for criterion III are the smallest, as was also true of the other
cases.
Moreover, in a case opposite to case 3 (APeD = [-10.0 ton, 10.0 ton)1), all criteria give the
same optimum solutions, and the errors in elevation of both points are active. this being the
most severe case.
-\ 'ttl..
~
(/)
W - f-- - f?4: - 1-- -- \
W
II: -30 -I"'"", - 4-- -- ~ \
II: -30
-40 -40
K, K2 K. K. K. K. K7 Ke K. K,o K K 2 K• K K K K• K• K 10
(a) (a)
l§
~
('Yo)
10 0 Belore Acljusl..-rt
~ CoOlplet~u:me",
:t========
-1_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
II:
~
II:
('Yo)
10 o
~ ---------
W
•
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
W • CompletIon of ,Creep
~ o~~_~
in
~
u;
0 E_=_=_===_~_~_~.IE=t
II: -10
K, K2 K. K. K. K. K7 Ko K. Koo It! - j 0 ~========+====:::::===
K, K2 K. K. K. Ko K7 Ke Ke K,o
( b) (bl
FIG. 6. Results Using Optimization Criterion III: (a) Elevation FIG. 7. Results Using Optimization Criterion IV: (a) Elevation
of Girders; (b) Cable Forces (.1P~/Pol) of Grlders; (b) Cable Forces (.1P~/Pol)
Crttorlon
(mml
--- I
-20
--- I II:
I---~~--"''''C I-~I.-\-- - • ~ -15
----- IV II:
W
.J -10
000
~ 1i1 ~o g g 8 g 8 ~
I "7 ~ '? 1 -? enW - 5
FIG. 8. Tower Bending Moments: (a) Comple- FIG. 9. Displacement History of Point 8 while All
tion of Adjustments; (b) End of Creep Steps Are Adjusted and at End of Creep Period
As just shown, the cable force application error usually cannot be eliminated, and therefore
appropriate accurate control cannot be achieved if the influence of creep is not taken into
account.
CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions can be drawn from this study:
In concrete cable-stayed bridges, the elevation of the girders and the cable forces require
control because of certain assumptions made in the course of design and construction. The
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
problem can be formulated as the optimization of a single objective function by treating the
work as an objective function, taking cable forces and elevation to be constraints.
It is possible to formulate the minimum work criteria including creep effects by defining the
influence matrix of the work. The appropriateness of the minimum work criterion was also
demonstrated.
In concrete cable-stayed bridges, the adjustment control method utilized for steel cable-stayed
bridges cannot be applied, because it fails to take account of the influence of creep.
When optimization is done according to the criterion that minimizes the work of both elastic
and creep deformation, an efficient optimum solution tending to eliminate residual errors can
be obtained, because better use is made in this case of the mutual influence of each adjusting
cable force.