Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Summary: Two kinds of hybrid stress-ribbon bridges for pedestrian use, the ‘stress-ribbon
suspension’ and the ‘stress-ribbon cable-stayed suspension’ bridges, were preliminary-designed. The
girder of these bridges is composed of edge beams of steel or pre-stressed concrete; and an open grating
deck plate, cross beams and lateral bracings of steel. Numerical analyses and wind tunnel 2D model
studies were conducted to examine the static characteristics and the aerodynamic stability of these
structures. It was found that the horizontal component of tensile force in the cables can be reduced up
to one-fourteenth of a conventional concrete stress-ribbon bridge, that the maximum deflection of the
girder is controlled nearly below the allowable value, that the stresses in the cables and the edge beams
are below the allowable value and that the critical flutter speed is expected to be high enough. The
application of the proposals for hybrid structures to vehicle bridges was also discussed and there is
feasibility that the proposal could be applicable to vehicle bridges.
Keywords: hybrid bridge in structure and material; stress-ribbon bridge; suspension bridge;
cable-stayed bridge; static characteristics; aerodynamic stability; critical flutter speed.
Fig. 1 Earlier proposed stress-ribbon suspension bridge. Elevation, (a); cross-sections of full-steel girder, (b); and
pre-stressed concrete girder, (c).
0.16
Lower Cable Hanger
B =2.4
(a) (c)
Steel or PreStressed Concrete Edge Beam
123 2.0
25.5 72 25.5 Concrete Tower
BE =1.8
9.85
12.3 (f/L=0.1)
2.46 (f/L=0.02) Upper Cable
0.16
Lower Cable Hanger (Unit in m) 0.21
(b) (d)
Fig. 2 Elevation of stress-ribbon cable-stayed suspension bridge (a); corresponding stress-ribbon suspension bridge,
(b); full-steel girder, (c); and hybrid girder in material with pre-stressed concrete edge beams, (d).
0.1. The dimensions and main physical properties for structure with the ‘concrete edge beams’, respectively.
this structure are listed in Table 1. Also the properties In these figures the abscissa denotes the
for Jinya Bridge, the steel stress-ribbon bridge and the non-dimensional cross-sectional area of the cables,
stress-ribbon suspension bridge are listed in the table. AU/AOU, AL/AOL and AS/AOS, where AOJ (J=U, L, S) is the
The stress-ribbon suspension bridge in Fig. 1(a) is optimum value applied to the proposal for each cable.
in the following referred to as the ‘earlier proposed As expected ymax depends almost entirely on AU.
hybrid’ bridge. Based on these results, AU was determined in the
following manner:
2.2 Preliminary design 1. AU is so determined as to keep ymax nearly below
It has been shown in the study of the ‘steel the allowable value of 205 mm.
stress-ribbon’ and ‘earlier proposed hybrid’ bridges that Regarding the determination of AL and AS, the following
one of the most important subjects in their design was manner was applied:
the control of the large deflections under live load. 2. Both the upper and lower cables can be subjected
Therefore, the effects of the cross-sectional area of the to uniform dead load, wU and wL. The ratio of
upper, lower and stay cables, AU, AL and AS, on the wU/wL is 7:3. The stay-cables are subjected to
maximum deflection of the girder, ymax, were examined that with the same value of wU.
at the early preliminary design stage of the 3. AL was determined so that all the segments can be
‘stress-ribbon cable-stayed suspension’ bridge. Fig. suspended only by the lower cables during the
3(a) and 3(b) show the results of ymax for the structure erection of the girder.
with the ‘steel edge beams’ subjected to uniform live The optimum values of AU and AL for the bridge with
load in the entire span and to asymmetrical live load the steel and concrete edge beams are listed in Table 1.
over half the span length, and Fig. 4(a) and (b) for the
60 60
w Upper Cable w Upper Cable
p Lower Cable p Lower Cable
Stay Cable Steel Edge Beam Stay Cable
ymax (cm )
ymax (cm )
40 Steel Edge Beam 40
20 20
0 0
0.2 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8 0.2 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8
AU/ AOU,AL / AOS ,AS /AOL (a) AU/ AOU,AL / AOS ,AS /AOL (b)
Fig. 3 Maximum deflection for stress-ribbon cable-stayed suspension bridge with ‘steel edge beams’ subjected to
uniform live load in the entire span, (a); and that subjected to asymmetrical live load over half the span
length, (b).
60 60
w Upper Cable w Upper Cable
p p
Lower Cable Lower Cable
Concrete Edge Beam Stay Cable Concrete Edge Beam Stay Cable
ymax (cm )
ymax (cm )
40 40
20 20
0 0
0.2 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8 0.2 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8
AU/ AOU,AL / AOS ,AS /AOL (a) AU/ AOU,AL / AOS ,AS /AOL (b)
Fig. 4 Maximum deflection for stress-ribbon cable-stayed suspension bridge with ‘concrete edge beams’ subjected to
uniform live load in the entire span, (a); and that subjected to asymmetrical live load over half the span
length, (b).
2 114 (Steel)
A (cm ) 7296 79 50 602
3706 (Concrete)
4) 4380 (Steel)
I (cm 390000 4386 1600 16100
768000 (Concrete)
1025 (Upper) 360 (Upper) 414 (Upper)
H W (kN ) 10700 1131 1465 995 1475
440 (Lower) 635 (Lower) 1061 (Lower)
Cable
Ymax =16.5 cm
Ymax =15.9 cm
Ymax =16.7 cm
Ymax =19.9 cm
Fig. 5 Comparison between deflection for full-steel ‘stress-ribbon cable-stayed suspension’ bridge and for full-steel
‘stress-ribbon suspension’ bridge subjected to uniform live load in entire span, (a); and that subjected to
asymmetrical live load over half span length, (b).
the ‘whole girder’ of the suspension structure. In the ‘suspension’ structures with d = 40 cm with and without
stress analysis, it was found that the maximum the central clamp. The central clamp induces very
combined stress in the edge beam due to bending large bending moment in the girder at the mid-span.
moment and normal force is far below the allowable The rotation of the clamp due to the horizontal
stress, σa, of 14 kN/cm2. movement of the cable towards the loaded span causes
As mentioned above, the central clamp is installed such locally large bending moment [6].
at the mid-span keeping the cable-to-girder distance, d, Fig. 9 summarizes the effects of the central clamp
to be zero. The central clamp and d effects on the and d on ymax and Mmax for the ‘cable-stayed suspension’
static characteristics under asymmetrical live load were and ‘suspension’ structures. In the figure the black
also examined in the analysis where d was taken to be 0 circle denotes the proposed design. It can be seen that
or 40 cm. It was found that Ymax for the ‘suspension’ the clamp with d = 0 cm is quite effective for a decrease
structure with d = 40 cm without the central clamp in both ymax and Mmax and that the clamp with d = 40 cm
decreases to 1/2.3 in the case where d = 0 with the is not necessarily effective for a decrease in Mmax.
clamp and that Ymax for the ‘cable-stayed suspension’
structure with d = 40 cm without the clamp decreases to 3.2. Comparison between characteristics for two
1/1.6 in the case where d = 0 with the clamp. Fig. 8(a) types of bridges with concrete edge beams and those
and 8(b) respectively show the bending moment with steel beams
diagrams for the ‘cable-stayed suspension’ and The characteristics for two types of structure with
Cable- Cable- Cable- Cable-
Stayed Suspension Stayed Stayed Suspension Stayed
w w w w
20 p p p p
-160
Steel Edge Beam Steel Edge Beam
M (k N ・m )
10
N (k N )
-60
0
-10 40
(m) (m)
0 25 49 74 98 123 0 25 49 74 98 123
(a) (b)
Fig. 6 Bending moment diagram, (a), and normal force diagram, (b), for stress-ribbon ‘cable-stayed suspension’
bridge with steel edge beams under full and asymmetric loads.
Suspension Suspension
-210
20 w w
p p
M (k N ・m )
-110 w
p
0 w
p
-10 Steel Edge Beam
-10
(m) (m)
0 25 49 74 98 123 0 25 49 74 98 123
(a) (b)
Fig. 7 Bending moment diagram, (a), and normal force diagram, (b), for stress-ribbon ‘suspension’ bridge with steel
edge beams under full and asymmetric loads.
Cable- Cable-
Stayed Suspension Stayed Suspension
50 50
Cable-to-girder with central clamp Cable-to-girder with central clamp
30 distance d=40cm without central clamp 30 distance d=40cm without central clamp
Steel Edge Beam Steel Edge Beam
M (k N ・m )
M (k N ・m )
10 10
-10 -10
-30 -30
(m) (m)
-50 -50
0 25 49 74 98 123 0 25 49 74 98 123
(a) (b)
Fig. 8 Bending moment diagrams for stress-ribbon ‘cable-stayed suspension’ bridge, (a), and those for stress-ribbon
‘suspension’ bridge, (b), with cable-to-girder distance, d, of 40 cm with and without central clamp (steel
edge beams).
the ‘concrete edge beams’ were also examined in the pre-stressing force for the ‘cable-stayed suspension’
same manner presented in section 3.1. The results are bridge is below σa. While the maximum combined
summarized in Fig. 10. Significant differences stress for the ‘suspension’ bridge, which is induced at
between Fig. 10 and Fig. 9 cannot be seen. It was the fixed end at the abutment, is above σa, and therefore,
found that the maximum combined stress in the edge a partial increase in the cross-sectional area of the beam
beam due to bending moment, normal force and is necessary.
Central Clamp Central Clamp
d w d w
p p
Cable Stayed 40cm Cable Stayed 40cm
Suspension
0cm Steel Edge Beam Suspension 0cm
Steel Edge Beam
40cm 40cm
Suspension Suspension
0cm 0cm
15 25 35 45 (cm) 5 15 25 35 (kN・m)
ymax Mmax
(a) (b)
Fig. 9 Effects of central clamp and cable-to-girder distance on maximum deflection, (a), and maximum bending
moment, (b), for two kinds of bridge with ‘steel edge beams’.
40cm 40cm
Suspension Suspension
0cm 0cm
15 25 35 45 (cm) 5 15 25 35 (kN・m)
ymax Mmax
(a) (b)
Fig. 10 Effects of central clamp and cable-to-girder distance on maximum deflection, (a), and on maximum bending
moment, (b), for two kinds of bridge with ‘concrete edge beams’
-0.4 -0.4
α= +3° α= -3° , 0°, +3°
-0.2 fT f B = 1.40 -0.2
fT fB = 1.19
δ
δ
0 0
0.2 0.2
0.4 0.4
0 5 10 15Vr 0 5 10 15 20 25V
r
0 10 20 30 40 50 VFS 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 VFS
(m/s) (m/s)
Asym. 1st Sym. 1st Asym. 2nd Sym. 2nd Jinya Sym. 2nd Sym. 1st Asym. 1st
f =0.500 Hz f =0.722 Hz f =1.14 Hz f =1.13 Hz f =1.15 Hz f =1.63 Hz f =2.51 Hz
Fig. 12 Lower modes and frequencies of natural vibration for earlier developed stress-ribbon suspension bridge.
Sym. 1st Asym. 1st Sym. 2nd Asym. 2nd Sym. 1st Asym. 1st
f = 0.73 f = 0.91 f = 1.28 f = 1.69 f = 1.12 f = 1.68 (a)
Sym. 1st Asym. 1st Sym. 2nd Asym. 2nd Sym. 1st Asym. 1st
f = 0.71 f = 0.90 f = 1.26 f = 1.64 f = 1.06 f = 1.61 (b)
Fig. 14 Lower modes and frequencies of natural vibration for stress-ribbon cable-stayed suspension bridge with
‘steel edge girder’, (a), and those with ‘concrete edge girder’, (b).
Sym. 1st Asym. 1st Sym. 2nd Asym. 2nd Sym. 1st Asym. 1st
f = 0.71 f = 079 f = 1.03 f = 1.04 f = 1.10 f = 1.31
Fig. 15 Lower modes and frequencies of natural vibration for stress-ribbon suspension bridge with concrete edge
girder.
aerodynamically stable only in the case where the that the symmetric 1st mode in torsion and the
‘partial concrete’ girder is not used. The flutter symmetric 1st mode in vertical bending shown in Fig.
characteristics of this ‘improved full-steel’ structure are 14(b) are coupled. It is seen in Fig. 13 that VFr for this
discussed below. bridge is high enough: above 20 that corresponds to
above 50 m/s for the full-scale bridge.
4.2 Flutter characteristics of improved hybrid Although the flutter characteristics of the
bridges ‘stress-ribbon suspension’ bridge in Fig. 2(b) have not
Fig. 13 shows the 2D wind tunnel model test yet been examined, it is expected that almost the same
results for the ‘stress-ribbon cable-stayed suspension’ results in Fig. 13 may be obtained. Because there are
bridge with the concrete edge beams. It was assumed no significant differences between the natural vibration
characteristics in the coupled modes for the vehicle bridges was also discussed and there is
‘suspension’ structure shown in Fig. 15 and those for feasibility that the proposal could be applicable to
the ‘cable-stayed suspension’ structure in Fig. 14. vehicle bridges.
6. Concluding Remarks 記
A preliminary design was made for the proposed 1. 指導教授: Prof. Niels J. Gimsing
‘stress-ribbon cable-stayed suspension’ and the 1. 研 修 先 : Dept. of Structures and Materials,
‘stressribbon suspension’ bridges for pedestrian use. Technical Univ. of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark
The girder has either steel or pre-stressed concrete edge 1. 研修期間: 2000 年 7 月 14 日~9 月 16 日
beam. Numerical analyses and wind tunnel 2D model
studies were conducted, and it was found that the
horizontal component of tensile force in the cables can
be reduced up to one-fourteenth of the conventional
concrete stress-ribbon bridge, that the maximum
deflection of the girder is controlled nearly below the
allowable value, that the stresses in the cables and the
edge beams are below the allowable value and that the
critical flutter speed is expected to high enough. The
application of the proposals for hybrid structures to