Effect of Pylon shape on response of Cable

Stayed Suspension Hybrid Bridge

Patel Kartik Hasmukhbhai
P. G. Student,
M. S. Patel Department of Civil Engineering,
Chandubhai S. Patel Institute of Technology,
Charotar University of Science and Technology (CHARUSAT),
Changa, Gujarat, (India)
kartikdholu11@gmail.com
+91 9408125662

Dr. V. R. Panchal
Professor and Head,
M. S. Patel Department of Civil Engineering,
Chandubhai S. Patel Institute of Technology,
Charotar University of Science and Technology (CHARUSAT),
Changa, Gujarat, (India)
vijaypanchal.cv@charusat.ac.in
+91 9979046204

ABSTRACT

Need of long span bridge has increased with growth of infrastructure. Cable Stayed Suspension Hybrid Bridge (CSSHB) has an
upper hand in preference over suspension bridge and/ or cable stayed bridge. Dynamic analysis is attempted to examine effect of
pylon shape on pylon top displacement and axial force experienced in the main cable for different time history analysis using
SAP2000. 1400 m span CSSHB has been used for the same. Parametric study for various cable configurations has been done. H type
tower gives optimal results. Harp configuration provides least pylon top displacement while fan type provides least axial force
amongst cases compared.
4. Stay cable
KEY WORDS: Cable Stayed Bridge; Suspension Bridge;
Cable Stayed Suspension Hybrid Bridge; SAP2000. 5. Pylon tower
6. Deck
INTRODUCTION

Need of long span bridge has increased with growth of

infrastructure. The requirement of incredible long span
bridges is increased day by day with increase in
inhabitants and their needs. To achieve a very long
span bridge, use of high strength material along with
novel structural system is essential. In general to
achieve longer span bridges, cable-stayed and
suspension systems are used, in which the cable-stayed
bridge has better structural stiffness and suspension
bridge has ability to offer longer span. Combination of
Fig.1 Schematic Diagram of CSSHB
above two structural systems could achieve a very long
span CSSHB. CSSHB has an upper hand in preference
A. Various types of pylons
over suspension bridge and/ or cable stayed bridge as it
incorporates advantages of both cable stayed as well as
suspension bridges.
As shown in Fig.1 major superstructure components of
CSSHB can be enlisted as

1. Cable stayed main cable

2. Suspension main cable
3. Hanger cable

1
NHCE 2017 Kartik Patel
 Twin Portal A-Frame Single Delta
(a)
A-Frame Diamond (b)H-shape Y-shape
Fig.2 Configuration of pylon in CSSHB
For low level (river), Y-frame as shown in Fig.2, is
recommended. For higher level (sea), A-frame as
shown in Fig.2 is recommended. The recommended
height of the tower is between 20 to 25 % of the length
of the center span. Increasing the height of the towers
decreases the steel consumption of the cables as well as
the longitudinal compressive force in the deck;
however, it increases the cost of the tower itself. It is
preferable to keep the towers vertical. Inclined towers
are aesthetically good but difficult to construct and are
even uneconomical.
B. Arrangement of stay cable
Based on longitudinal arrangement the stay cable
arrangement can be categorized as:
1. Radial system
2. Harp system
3. Fan system
NHCE 2017
Fig.3 Pattern of cable arrangement (Krishna Raju, 2009)
Also, spatial arrangement of cable system can be
classified as
1. Two vertical plane system
2. Inclined plane system
3. Single plane system
The evolution of CSSHB type of bridges dates back to
John A. Roebling’s great contribution to the Brooklyn
Bridge as a masterpiece in the late 19th century. In his
innovative work, stay cables were installed in the
suspension bridge to reduce the displacement of the
girder (Fig.4a). German engineer F. Dischinger
improved the concept by eliminating the vertical
hangers in the cable-stayed parts (Fig.4b) in the 1930s
(These hangers are called cross hangers hereafter).
(a) Roebling’s structural system
(b) Dichinger’s structural system
Fig.4 Structural System (Sun et al., 2013)
LITERATURE SURVEY
Parekh et al. (2016) investigated the seismic response
of Pandit Dindayal Upadhyay cable stayed bridge
isolated with Friction Pendulum System (FPS) and
Triple Friction Pendulum System (TFPS) on Tapi
River at Surat. The dynamic analysis was carried out
by using SAP2000 software.
Savaliya et al. (2015) carried out static and dynamic
analysis of CSSHB of the east channel of Lingding
Strait in China having span of 1400m using SAP2000
software and also time period of bridge for different
2
Kartik Patel
mode shape was presented.

Savaliya et al. (2015) studied effects of support

Conditions on Static Behavior of 1400m main span and
700 m side span cable-stayed Bridge.
Zhang and Sun Bin-Nam (2004) carried out three
dimensional nonlinear aerodynamic stability analysis 319 m 1400 m 319 m
of cable stayed suspension Hybrid bridge span of 1400
m. They studied the effects of cable sag, length of
suspension portion, cable arrangement on the
aerodynamic stability of the bridge.
Fig.5 Geometric configuration of CSSHB
Lai et al. (2004) conducted study to investigate the
efficiency of isolation system for retrofitting cable
stayed bridges. B. Member details
SALIENT FEATURES OF CSSHB
Table 1. Member details
A. Geometrical details (Zhang et al., 2004)
 East channel of Lingding Strait in China Members E (MPa) A (m²)
2.1×105
 Main span = 1400 m Girder 1.761
 Side Span = 319 m 3.3× 104
Tower C 30
 Height of Pylon = 259.875 m 3.3 ×104
 Dimension of tower’s column = 6×5 m Tower’s TB 10
 Transverse beam = 3.17×3.17 m 2.0 ×105
Main Cable CS 0.3167
 Deck = Closed box concrete 2.0 ×105
Main Cable SS 0.3547
 Girders = 36.8 m wide, 3.494 m high.
2.0 ×105
 H – shape , A-Frame(Fan), A-Frame(Harp) and Hanger Cable 0.0064
Y-shape pylon 2.0 ×105
Stayed Cables 0.31
Eelastic modulus; Aarea; CSCable stay;
SSSuspension side; Ctower’s column; TBtower’s
transverse beam.
C. Geometry generated in SAP2000

3
NHCE 2017 Kartik Patel
 Fig.6 3D view of CSSHB
40 m

66 m

259 m
Main
The deck section (girder) has been assigned (Fig.7) as
cable
concrete frame element. 103.784 m
36.8 m

3.494 m

9.9 m 8.5 m 8.5 m 9.9 m 53.201 m

Fig.7 Deck section

Fig.9 H- shape pylon

Fig.8 Longitudinal view of deck

ANALYSIS OF CABLE STAYED SUSPENSION
HYBRID BRIDGE

A. Load Assignments (Savaliya et al., 2015)

DL= 97.980 kN/m

SIDL= 50.0 kN/m
LL = 34.650 kN/m
(Above load assign on Deck)
B. Dynamic Analysis of Bridge
Modal time history analysis was carried out to
recognize the dynamic behavior of bridge. Every mode
consists of a mode shape and a set of modal properties
like Time periods and Frequencies of the structure.
Results are presented for different pylon shape for
CSSHB.

C. Analysis results and discussions

Dynamic analysis was carried out to determine

4
NHCE 2017 Kartik Patel
response of the structure for different pylon shapes.
The validation of the bridge can be judged by structure
response to the applied load cases. The seismic
response of CSSHB with near fault ground motions for
different pylon shapes and results of axial force in the
main cable and displacements at top of pylon were
noted.
To evaluate the seismic response of cable stayed
bridge, six near fault ground motions (shown in Table
2) are used for analysis of CSSHB.

Table 2. Near fault ground motions data

Near-fault
Recording Duration PGD PGV
ground
station (sec) (m) (m/sec)
motions

Landers,
Lucerne
California, 49.284 2.3 1.36
Valley
1992
Northridge,
California, Sylmar 60 0.311 1.22
1994
Imperial
Valley,
El Centro#7 36.9 0.491 1.13
California,
1979
Northridge,
California, Newhall 60 0.381 1.19
1994
Imperial
Valley,
El Centro#5 39.42 0.765 0.98
California,
1979
Northridge,
California, Rinaldi 14.95 0.391 1.75
1994

5
NHCE 2017 Kartik Patel
Table 3. Axial force (kN) in Main cable

Pylon Shape
Near-fault ground motions H-Shape Y-Shape A-Frame (Harp) A-Frame (Fan)

El Centro#5 128294 130635 148157 128608

El Centro#7 128367 130927 144636 128916
Newhall 131833 134412 145742 132492
Lucerne Valley 129129 131698 147070 129706
Rinaldi 132645 135146 145237 133111
Sylmar 131817 134406 146736 132480

Fig.10 Axial Force (kN) in Main cable

Table 4. Displacement (mm) at top of pylon

Pylon Shape
Near-fault ground motions A-Frame
H-Shape Y-Shape A-Frame (Fan)
(Harp)

El Centro#5 1004.2 1033.6 583.1 997.1

El Centro#7 1004.5 1033.9 583.4 997.4
Newhall 994 1019.1 574.7 982.3
Lucerne Valley 1166.3 1173.6 847 1139.6
Rinaldi 1005.8 1035.6 584.6 999.2
Sylmar 1013 1044.3 589.7 1008.7

6
NHCE 2017 Kartik Patel
Fig.11 Displacement at top of pylon
From the Figures 10 and 11, it is found that bridge
modelled in the SAP2000 give the results which are
found similar with results presented in the literature.
From the dynamic analysis, it is found that axial force
and displacement results are synchronized with the
available results. Similar trends those observed in
Figures 10 and 11 is also observed in Tables 3 and 4.
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, the modeling of CSSHB has been carried
out for 4 different types of pylon’s shape (as clearly
tabulated) i.e, A-Frame (Harp) type, A-Frame (fan)
type, Y-type and H-type on SAP2000 software.
 H type tower gives optimal design as it
induces least axial force amongst the group
analyzed.
 A type (Harp) should be the second option as
far as effect of pylon shape on axial force in
main cable is considered.
 H type tower probably offers enhanced
(torsional) stability and stiffness thereby
responses compared to other shapes in the
group analysed.
 A type frame gives optimal design as it
induces least displacement amongst the group
analysed.
 Harp configuration shows better results
yielding lesser displacement of pylon top.
 The results truly and synchronisingly vary
with the change in time history analysis (g and
duration).
NHCE 2017 Kartik Patel
REFERENCES
Bin Sun, C. S. Cai, and Rucheng Xiao (2013) ‘Analysis
Strategy and Parametric Study of Cable-Stayed-Suspension
Bridges’ Advances in Structural Engineering Vol 16,
pp 1081-1102.
Zhang Xin-jun, Sun Bing-nan, (2004) ‘Aerodynamic stability
of cable-stayed-suspension hybrid bridges’ Journal of
Zhejiang University Science, Vol 6, pp 869-874.
G. M. Savaliya, A. K. Desai and S. A.Vasanwala, (2015)
‘Static and dynamic analysis of cable-stayed suspension
hybrid bridge & validation’ International Journal of
Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology, Vol 6A,
pp 91-98.
G.M.Savaliya, A. K. Desai and S. A. Vasanwala, (2015)
‘Effect of Support Conditions on Static Behavior of 1400m
main span and 700m side span Cable-stayed Bridge
International Journal of Latest Trends in Engineering and
Technology, Vol 6, pp 380-386.
Sachi Parekh, Dr. M. Kumar, Dr. V. R. Panchal, (2016)
‘Seismic response of cable stayed bridge isolated with triple
friction pendulum system’ International Journal of
Innovative Research in Science & Eng, Vol 2, pp 202-214.
T Suzuki, H Kudo, A Hasegawa, Y Shioi (2005), ‘Structural
characteristics of the nagisa-bridge’ 30th Conference on Our
world in concrete & structures, Vol 51, pp 491-499.
G. M. Savaliya, A. K. Desai and S. A. Vasanwala,
(2015)’Analysis Of Differently Configurated Cable
Supported Bridges and Its Validation’ International Journal
Of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT), Vol 2,
pp 1741-1745.
Gwolong Lai, Chien-Chou Chen, and Ming Chia HSU (2004)
‘Cable-stayed Bridge retrofits using isolation system’ 13th
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver,
Vol 3253.
Krishna Raju, N. (June 2009) Design of Bridges, 4th Edition,
Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.
7