The Effect of Side Span Length on the

Behavior of Long-Span Hybrid Cable-Stayed

Suspension Bridge
Ghanshyam M Savaliya*, Atul K Desai** and Sandeep A Vasanwala***

Accomplishing maximum spans by creating new bridge systems has always been an
interesting logical challenge. The concepts of modified cable-supported bridges have
been proposed in the past that promise to surpass the more traditional cable-supported
bridges in terms of maximum span length. The innovation in structural form, material
technology and methods of analysis serve economy and better performance for longer
span bridge structural system. The construction of long-span bridge is possible using
high strength materials, innovative forms of structural system and novel method of
analysis and design. The cable-stayed bridge and suspension bridge are structural
systems used to achieve longer span bridges. The cable-stayed bridge has better
structural stiffness and the suspension bridge has the ability to provide longer central
span. To achieve a very long-span bridge with better structural behavior, a combination
of the above two structural systems serves the purpose. The innovative form of hybrid
cable-stayed suspension bridge with 1400 m main span and 700 m central suspension
portion is considered for the analysis. The geometrical parameter like length of side
span also plays an important role in the behavior of bridges. In this paper, bridge
behavior is presented for variable length of side span. Nonlinear static analysis and
modal analysis are carried out using SAP2000 software. The effects of side span
length on the static performance of bridge are presented in the form of axial forces in
deck and main cables. The dynamic behavior of the bridge is presented in the form of
time period of bridge in lateral and vertical directions.

Keywords: Long-span cable-supported bridge, Hybrid cable-stayed suspension bridge, Side

span length, Dynamic analysis

Introduction
Generally, cable-supported bridges can be subdivided into two groups: cable-stayed
bridges and suspension bridges. Long-span cable-supported bridges can be
accomplished using high strength steel cables as a key force resisting structural
element. Their use leads to a competitive solution for spans between 200 m and
2000 m. In a bridge system, border line for a maximum span is determined by the

* Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering Department, Government Engineering College, Majura Gate, Surat,
Gujarat, India. E-mail: ghanshyam_savaliya@yahoo.com
** Professor, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel National Institute of Technology, Surat, Gujarat, India.
E-mail: akd@amd.svnit.ac.in
* * * Professor, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel National Institute of Technology, Surat, Gujarat, India.
E-mail: sav@amd.svnit.ac.in

The
2014
Effect
IUPof
. All
Side
Rights
SpanReserved.
Length on the Behavior 1
of Long-Span Hybrid Cable-Stayed Suspension Bridge
strength, stiffness and density of materials used. So, a high strength material is one area
of research and much research has been done in this area. These cable-stayed bridges
and suspension bridges, although similar in philosophy, have many differences in practice.
One of the main reasons for their advantages in relation to other forms of bridge is the
most efficient way in which the system uses materials, i.e., direct stress under which all
the fibers have the same stress, resulting in full utilization of the material. The aspects of
suspension bridge and cable-stayed bridge are illustrated here.

1.1 Suspension Bridge

A suspension bridge is a type of bridge in which the deck of the bridge is supported
with the vertical hangers. These vertical hangers are connected to main suspension
catenary cables. The main catenary cables are supported at pylons and anchored at
the end span with anchorage. The cable arrangement in the suspension bridge system
is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Suspension Bridge Configuration

Main Catenary
Cables

Pylon Suspended Cables Pylon

Anchorage Anchorage
Side Central Side
Span Span Span

1.2 Cable-Stayed Bridge

A cable-stayed bridge is a bridge in which the deck is supported by pylons using
inclined high strength steel cable stays. Cable-stayed bridges have been built for
centuries, but they had not been developed to the same extent as other bridge types
till the 1950s. The cable-stayed bridge has been used for a span range from
approximately 150 m to 500 m, where it has proved to be very competitive against
truss, arch and box girder bridges. Recently, the central span achieved for cable-
stayed bridge has started to increase up to 1088 m. The cable arrangement in the
fan type cable-stayed bridge system is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Fan Type Cable-Stayed Bridge Configuration

Cable Stays

Pylon Deck Pylon

Side Central Span Side Span
Span

2 The IUP Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. VII, No. 3, 2014

 1.3 Hybrid Cable-Stayed Suspension Bridge
The requirement for long-span bridges is increasing day-by-day with increasing
population and their needs. A very long-span bridge can be built using high strength
materials, along with novel structural system. Here, innovative form of hybrid cable-
stayed suspension bridge is presented as an alternative to long-span bridge. Hybrid
cable-stayed suspension bridge is a combination of cable-stayed bridge system and
suspension bridge system, as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Hybrid Cable-Stayed Suspension Bridge

Suspension
Cable Cable Stays
Suspended Cables
(Hangers)

Pylon Deck
Anchorage
Cable-Stayed Portion Cable-Stayed Portion
Suspension Portion

The idea for this innovative system was first introduced by Dischinger (1949). Author pl
Thereafter, a very little work was done on this system. Advantages of combination chk, all
of both systems were discussed by Gimsing (1988), Schlaich (1988), Lin and Chaw underlined
(1991) and Starossek (1996). ref are not
1.3.1 Advantages of Hybrid Cable-Stayed Suspension Bridge in ref
By combining both the systems, the following advantages could be achieved:
1. As compared to the suspension bridge with the same span length, the
suspension portion can be greatly shortened, so the tensional forces in the
main cables are greatly decreased.

Author, pl clarify 2. This results to decrease the construction costs of the main cables, massive
the underlined anchors, difficulty to construct them in water, and therefore, makes it
possible to build in the soft soil foundation also.
3. As compared to cable-stayed bridges with the same span length, the cable-
stayed portion is also greatly shortened. This results in the height of tower
and length of stays, and the axial forces in the deck are consequently reduced.
4. In addition to these, cantilevers during erection are also shortened and
wind stability of the bridge under construction is therefore improved.
5. Different materials can be used in the suspension and cable-stayed portions.
For example, the light weight steel box girder can be used for suspension

The Effect of Side Span Length on the Behavior 3

of Long-Span Hybrid Cable-Stayed Suspension Bridge
 portion, and prestressed concrete girder can be used for the cable-stayed Author, pl
portion of the bridge. This results in saving the materials in deck. clarify the
6. As a result, it can make up for the deficiencies in the structural behavior, underlined
construction, economy and stability against wind and earthquake loading
in the traditional suspension and cable-stayed bridge.
7. Therefore, hybrid cable-stayed suspension bridge becomes an attractive
alternative in the design of long-span, particularly super long-span bridge
systems.

1.3.2 Analysis of Hybrid Cable-Stayed Suspension Bridge

A few authors have analyzed the hybrid cable-stayed suspension bridge. A dynamic
investigation of a hybrid cable-stayed and suspension bridge was discussed by Paultre
et al. (2000). Aerodynamic stability of 1400 m main span cable-stayed suspension
hybrid bridges was presented by Zhang and Bing-Nan (2005). Zhang Xin-Jun (2006)
discussed the effects of some design parameters on flutter stability of cable-stayed
suspension hybrid bridges. Zhang Xin-Jun (2007) investigated the mechanics
performance of cable-stayed bridge, suspension bridge and cable-stayed suspension
hybrid bridges. The bridge configuration of hybrid cable-stayed suspension bridge is
presented in Figure 4, which has side span l1 and one central main span l2.

Figure 4: Hybrid Cable-Stayed Suspension Bridge Configuration

x, u
Cable Stays
z Cables Slag
y
H
0 1 2 3 4
Pylon (Hangers) Deck
Anchorage
|1 |2=| |1
Cable-Stayed Portion Cable-Stayed Portion
Suspension Portion

For hybrid cable-stayed suspension bridge work related wind is found but for Author, pl clarify
seismic analysis a little work is noted. So, seismic analysis of 1400 m hybrid cable- the underlined
stayed suspension bridge was carried out using SAP2000 software.

2. Bridge Configuration Data

Modeling of 1,400 m main span earth anchored cable-stayed suspension hybrid bridge
was carried out in SAP2000 V14 software. The effect of side span length is considered
as governing parameter to establish the behavior of the bridge.
The bridge particulars are: bridge central span length = 1,400 m. The suspension
portion to main span ratio in hybrid cable-stayed suspension bridge = 0.5. The side

4 The IUP Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. VII, No. 3, 2014

 span length is considered as the ratio of side span to main span (Table 1). The cross-
sectional properties of bridge structural elements are presented in Table 2.
Table 1: Considering Side Span Length for Analysis
of Cable-Stayed Bridge
Ratio of Side Span Length to 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
Main Span Length
Length of the Side Span (m) 210 280 350 420 490

Table 2: Cross-Sectional Properties of Hybrid Cable-Stayed Suspension

Bridge Members
E A Jd Iy Iz M Jm
Members
(Mpa) (m )2
(m )4
(m )4
(m )
4
(kg/m) (kgm2/m)

Girder 2.1 105 1.2481 5.034 1.9842 137.754 18386.5 1.85210 6

Stay Cable 2.0 105 0.0154 0.0 0.0 0.0 120.12 0.0
Hanger Cable 2.0 105 0.0065 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.2 0.0
Main Cable CS 2.0 10 5
0.3167 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,660 0.0
Main Cable SS 2.0 10 5
0.3578 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,980 0.0
Tower C 3.3 104 30 350 320 220 78,000 5.7 105
Tower TB 3.3 104 10 150 70 70 26,000 4.7 105
Note: E Modulus of Elasticity; A Cross-section area; M Mass per unit length;
Jd Torsional constant; Iy Lateral bending moment of inertia; Iz Vertical bending moment of
inertia; and Jm mass moment of inertia per unit length.
Source: Zhang Xin-Jun, 2007

The structural elements of bridge assigned with load cases are shown in Table 3.
The load cases considered for the analysis of the bridge are:
Static nonlinear analysis; and
Modal analysis
In the proposed investigation of hybrid cable-stayed suspension bridges, a three-
Author pl dimensional analysis was carried out using SAP2000 software v14.0.0. Released on
c h k , 5-05-2009 (Wilson, 1995).
underlined Table 3: Loads Assigned to the Different Members
ref is not
Type of the Load Value of Assigned Load Element Assigned
in ref
Dead Load 97.980 kN/m Deck
SIDL 50.0 kN/m Deck
Live Load 34.650 kN/m Deck

The Effect of Side Span Length on the Behavior 5

of Long-Span Hybrid Cable-Stayed Suspension Bridge
3. Results and Discussion
Static nonlinear analysis and dynamic analysis were carried out to determine the
response of the hybrid cable-stayed suspension bridge for different types of loadings.
Here, different side span lengths of bridge are considered for the study. The effect of
side span length can be judged by the structures response to the applied load cases.
To find out the effect of side span length on the dynamic behavior of bridge, modal
analysis for hybrid cable-stayed suspension bridge was carried out. Each mode
consists of a mode shape (normalized deflected shape) and a set of modal properties
like time periods and frequencies of the structure.

3.1 Static Nonlinear Analysis

The static parameters considered for the comparison of results in the parametric
study are as follows:

3.1.1 Axial Forces in Deck

Axial forces of the bridge with different lengths of side span in hybrid cable-stayed
suspension bridge are presented in Table 4. The negative sign shows that the deck is
subjected to compression. From Table 4, it is clear that deck axial force changes
significantly with change in the length of side span of the hybrid cable-stayed suspension
bridge.

Table 4: Axial Force (kN) in Bridge Deck with Different Side Span Length

Axial Force in Deck Length of Side Span in (m)

210 280 350 420 490
Near Pylon in Central Span 34,349 34,543 35,630 37,341 41,080
Near Pylon in Side Span 30,822 30,859 32,923 35,504 40,244
Center of Main Span 28,301 28,174 26,958 25,219 21,654

From Figure 5, it is clear that as the side span length increases, the axial force in
the side span deck also increases. The axial force in deck in side span increases because
with the increase in side span, the number of cable-stays in side span also increases,
which is taut with deck and transfer compressive force to the deck. It is also clear from
Figure 5 that up to a ratio of side span length to main span of 0.25, the cable-stays are
more vertical, transferring less compressive force to deck. After that, inclination of
cable-stays is more and subjected to more compressive force. With the change in side
span length, the axial force in deck at the center of the main span also changes.

3.1.2 Axial Forces in Main Cables

Axial forces in main centenary cable in central span and side span of the bridge with
different lengths of side span are presented in Table 5. It is known that as the side

6 The IUP Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. VII, No. 3, 2014

 Figure 5: Axial Force in Deck with Varying Side Span Length
of Hybrid Cable-Stayed Suspension Bridge

30,000
20,000
10,000
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
SSL to Span SSL to Span SSL to Span SSL to Span SSL to Span
=0.15 =0.20 =0.25 =0.30 =0.35
In Deck at Center of Span 28,301 28,174 26,958 25,219 21,654
Near Pylon in Central Span 34,349 34,543 35,630 37,341 41,080
Near Pylon in Side Span 30,822 30,859 32,923 35,504 40,244

Table 5: Axial Force (kN) in Bridge Deck with Different Side Span Lengths
Axial Force in Deck Length of Side Span in (m)
210 280 350 420 490
Main Cable in Side Span 230,289 196,065 171,888 155,211 132,046
Main Cable in Central Span 162,301 162,319 162,738 162,945 162,895

span length decreases, the axial force in side span main cable increases to resist the
longitudinal movement of pylon top. From Table 5, it is shown that axial force in side
span main cable decreases with increase in the length of side span. It is also shown
that axial force in central span main centenary cable remains constant with very little
variation.
3.2 Dynamic Analysis
The time period of the bridge for different mode shapes in lateral direction as well as in
vertical direction is analyzed (Tables 6 and 7). The long-span bridge is slender in structure
supported by pylons. The bridge is subjected first to lateral bending mode shapes.

Table 6: Time Period of the Bridge in Lateral Bending Modes

with Different Side Span Lengths
Layout Mode No. Length of Side Span (m)
210 280 350 420 490
1st Mode Lateral Bending 12.62 12.71 12.78 12.83 12.89
2nd Mode Lateral Bending 10.04 10.21 10.34 10.42 10.51
3 Mode Lateral Bending
rd
6.08 6.09 6.10 6.11 6.12

The Effect of Side Span Length on the Behavior 7

of Long-Span Hybrid Cable-Stayed Suspension Bridge
 Table 7: Time Period of the Bridge in Vertical Bending Modes
with Different Side Span Lengths
Length of Side Span (m)
Layout Mode No. 210 280 350 420 490
1st Mode Vertical Bending 5.19 5.20 5.24 5.30 5.32
2nd Mode Vertical Bending 4.81 4.81 4.82 4.82 4.84
3rd Mode Vertical Bending 4.23 4.26 4.31 4.34 4.41

Conclusion
From the analysis carried out on hybrid cable-stayed suspension bridge, the following
observations are made:

With decrease in the length of side span from 490 m to 210 m, the axial
force in deck at side span is reduced to 76.58%.

With increase in the length of side span from 210 m to 490 m, the axial
force in deck at the center of main span is reduced to 76.51%.

With decrease in the length of side span from 490 m to 210 m, the axial
force in main catenary cable in side span is reduced to 57.34%.

The time period of the deck in lateral bending in 1st and 2nd modes is
reduced to 97.90% and 95.50%, respectively, from side span length 490 m
to 210 m.

The time period of the deck in vertical bending in 1st mode is reduced to
97.55% from side span length 490 m to 210 m.

References
1. Paultre P, Proulx J and BeHgin T (2000), Dynamic Investigation of a Hybrid
Suspension and Cable-Stayed Bridge, Earthquake Engg. Struct. Dyn., Vol. 29,
pp. 731-739.

2. Starossek U (1996), Cable Stayed Bridge Concept of Longer Spans, Journal of

Bridge Engg., Vol. 1, August, pp. 99-103.

3. Zhang Xin-jun (2006), Study of Design Parameters on Flutter Stability of Cable

StayedSuspension Hybrid Bridges, Wind and Structures, Vol. 9, No. 4
pp. 331-344.

4. Zhang Xin-Jun (2007), Investigations on Mechanics Performance of Cable-Stayed

Suspension Hybrid Bridges, Wind and Structures, Vol. 10, No. 6,
pp. 533-542.

8 The IUP Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. VII, No. 3, 2014

 5. Zhang Xin-jun and Bing-nan S (2005), Aerodynamic Stability of Cable-Stayed-
Suspension Hybrid Bridges, Journal of Zhejiang University Science, Vol. 6A,
No. 8, 869-874.

Reference # 62J-2014-07-xx-01

The Effect of Side Span Length on the Behavior 9

of Long-Span Hybrid Cable-Stayed Suspension Bridge