Composites: Part B 27B (1996) 307-317

Copyright ~ 1996 Elsevier Science Limited

Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
t'I.SEVIER 1359-8368(95)00016-X 1359-8368/96/$15.00

Analysis and design methodology for an FRP

cable-stayed pedestrian bridge

Magdi A. Khalifa*, Osama A. Hodhodt and Mohammed A. Zaki

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln,
NE 68588-0531, USA
(Received January 1995, accepted April 1995)

This paper describes the various analysis and design aspects of a fiber reinforced plastic (FRP) bridge. The
design methodology is illustrated by describing the steps taken in the design of the first US FRP cable-stayed
pedestrian bridge to be constructed in Lincoln, Nebraska. The analysis is made using three dimensional
(3-D) macro models of the bridge to describe its overall behavior under static and dynamic loads. Separate
analysis is done to study the local stability of the different structural elements. The orthotropy of the
material is taken into account during this analysis. The short term and long term stiffnesses and strengths are
evaluated and accounted for in the design process.
(Keywords: fiber reinforcedplastics (FRP); cable-supported bridge; pedestrian bridge; mode shapes; honeycomb;cable-stayed
bridge)

INTRODUCTION to correlate the experimentally observed behaviors of

A cable-stayed bridge is a deck stayed by cables attached to
one or more towers as shown schematically in Figure I. This
type of construction is one of the oldest known to mankind.
However, the modem implementation of that system began
after the Second World War when high strength materials
and modern analysis procedures became available.
Cable-stayed bridges are the most efficient structural
system for moderate to long crossings 1. They also
provide an aesthetically appealing shape that usually
fits in the surrounding terrain.
The introduction of cable-stayed bridges to the USA
came in the 1970s. Since then, more than 20 bridges have
been in service, under construction or under design.
Most existing cable-stayed bridges are for traffic use,
such as Quincy Bayview Bridge (Quincy, Illinois), Ship
Channel Bridge (Baytown, Texas), or Sunshine Skyway
Bridge (Tampa, Florida). Among the pedestrian cable-
stayed bridges is Menomonee Falls Bridge (Wisconsin).
The combination of the cable-stayed bridge system
and fiber reinforced plastics (FRPs) is a logical step in the
development of cable-stayed bridges since FRPs provide
superior strength to weight ratio, high corrosion resist-
ance, and low maintenance cost. The mechanical charac-
teristics of FRP's have been characterized experimentally
by many researchers 24. Theories have been developed 5'6
* To whom correspondence should be addressed
t On leave from Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
FRPs to analytical procedures. Reference 7 points out
that the efforts to incorporate FRP's in bridge engineer-
ing started two decades ago when the Miyun Bridge was
designed and constructed near Beijing, China. Then
hybrid bridge systems were adopted by the Chinese to
provide a flexible superstructure supported by a stiff
substructure. The first FRP cable-stayed bridge (Links
Leader Bridge over the River Tay) was constructed in
Scotland in 1992 with a main span of 63 m (207 ft). A
description of the project is reported in refs 8 and 9.
This paper describes the analysis and design of a cable-
stayed bridge in Lincoln, Nebraska to be made entirely
out of fiber reinforced plastics. This bridge is the first of
its type in the United States and will be the longest of its
type in the world with a main span of 122 m (400 ft) and a
total length of 274.3 m (900 ft) as shown in Figure 1.
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
The bridge under investigation will be constructed to
connect two parts of a commuter trail. The bridge will
cross a state highway, a major street, a park, and railroad
tracks. The location of the bridge is shown in Figure 2.
The bridge will enhance the safety of pedestrians and
commuters at this intersection.
As shown in Figure 2, the ends of the trail are 274.3 m
(900 ft) apart. It is desired that neither State Highway 2
nor 27th Street, a major arterial street in the city, is

307
Analysis and design of FRP. M. A. Khalifa et al.

8.84 m
0.91

25.08 m
76.2 m ~ 121.92 rn ~ 76.2 m

Figure 1 Schematic diagram of the Lincoln composite bridge 15.24m A t

SECTION A - A

9.14m

N~ .wy ~ -' ~---------_~; ~ A ' /

(a) (b)

Figure 3 Proposed filament wound tower

BURLINOTION I/
.........
~ J~ Jl~ 3 x 76.2mm "~-~1

I 1 ! -{

Figure 2 Location of the proposed Lincoln composite bridge A I I I I 3 I I I I I I I I I ONE PANEL

t
. . . .

interrupted. It is also planned that the park should not be

interrupted by the bridge supports. These constraints [ ,{.i i i i i i i 4.+1 i i I i i i ¢ ~¢ i i i I I I I 4"~*11 I 11 I I ,l+',~ I I I I I I I J
brought the cable-stayed bridge as the most suitable I~ 457m ~1
alternative for the crossing.
This arrangement requires a three span cable-stayed
bridge. The bridge towers are located close to the park
borders; State Highway 2 and 27th Street. Hence, the side
span length will be 76.2m (250 ft) and the main span to be
122m (400ft). The two towers are 24.1m (79ft) high
above the deck level. This ratio of the tower height to the
main span in 0.2. This ratio was shown l° to give optimum J REPRESENTS PANELS
structural design. The towers are diamond in shape as -- REPRESENTS NONSTRUCTURAL FAIRINGS

shown in Figure 3. This shape offers aesthetic appeal, high (b)

torsional stiffness, and ease of handling cable anchorages.
Towers are intended to be manufactured from filament
wound glass fiber reinforced plastics (GFRP).
Fan cable arrangement has been chosen for this project
because it facilitates cable anchorage, future inspection,
and maintenance work, if required. The cables are
arranged in two planes to offer torsional stiffness to the
deck. Each cable plane contains 40 cables (20 cables are
fanning from, each tower in each plane). Aramid fiber
cables, Kevlar 49, are proposed for this project.
There are two possible deck configurations:
Figure 4 Pultruded deck section and fairings
fairings as shown in Figure 4b. Pultruded G F R P is
suggested for this deck configuration.
2. A flat honeycomb G F R P plate deck with or
without longitudinal girders. Cross beams are
provided at each cable anchor as shown in Figure
5. This configuration is easier to manufacture and
construct since it minimizes the required number of
deck splices.

1. A box section with dimensions as shown in Figure
4a. This shape offers modularity. Changes in deck
depth or width can be acommodated easily by
adding or removing one or more of the structural
panels that constitute the cross section. Although
this type of box girder might not be the most suitable
aerodynamic shape, its aerodynamic characteristics
can be easily modified by the addition of suitable
The two configurations were studied and have proven
to be viable. Both configurations can be manufactured
by US FRP manufacturers.
STRUCTURAL DESIGN CRITERIA
FRPs are different from conventional construction

308
 Analysis and design of FRP: M. A. Khalifa et al.

direction) and this suits the axial loading condition that

STAYCABLE
J
d / SIDERAILING they are subject to.

In-plane strength of FRP laminates

The Structural Plastics Design Manual 14 cites a few
HONEYCOMB
PANEL
available criteria to describe the in-plane strength of
FRP laminates. Hill's criterion is a generalization of the
well known Von Mises criterion for isotropic materials.
The criterion is given by the relationship:

2 (a2j) 2 ~- ',0"2i'/2 ',,7-12f/2

1 (1)

where cr is normal stress, r is shear stress, f denotes

0.5 m 0.5 m
Figure 5 Honeycomb deck section
materials (steel or concrete) in their weight, strength,
durability and time dependent behavior. This section
presents the different design criteria for FRPs.
Strength criteria
FRPs are inherently orthotropic materials because of
the uneven distribution of the fibers in the three spatial
directions within the volume of the material. The
strength in the fiber direction is much higher in uni-
directional laminates, than those in the other directions.
In recent years, an intensive research work on the
strength characterization of FRP structural shapes has
been undertaken as demonstrated in refs 3 and 11. The
test results show that a ratio of four is expected between
the tensile strength in the fiber direction to that in the
cross fiber direction. A ratio of two is expected between
the compressive strength in the fiber direction to that in
the cross fiber direction. The shear strength is the same in
the two previously mentioned directions, however, the
ultimate strength, 1 denotes fiber direction, and 2
denotes cross fiber direction. In-plane strength of FRP
laminates under compressive normal stress is affected by
the buckling strength of the laminates. This section
provides a discussion of the studies performed on the two
proposed deck configurations.
Local buckling criteria for the multi-webbed box section.
The box section deck alternative shown in Figure 4a
has two instability modes. The box section elements
under compressive stress might have panel local buck-
ling, in which a whole panel might buckle as one member
as shown in Figure 6a. The second possible buckling
mode is inter-cellular buckling as shown in Figure 6a.
Panel local buckling. To investigate the sandwich plate
local buckling under the general state of normal and
f
PanelBuckling

interlaminar shear is slightly less. These results are valid H U(U H) I .H

for GFRP pultruded shapes with E-glass content of 40
45% and a polyester (or vinylester) matrix. Typical J
values for the different strengths are reported in refs 12
and 13. Table 1 summarizes the typical strength values
for pultruded structural shapes made of vinylester resin
containing 40-45% by weight E-glass fiber reinforce-
ment. Structural honeycomb GFRPs have the same IntercellularBuckling
(a)
strength values as pultruded GFRPs ~4.
The nominal tensile strength of the Aramid fiber
cables, Kevlar 49, is 1,924 MPa (279ksi). The cable
strength properties are unidirectional (in the fiber

Table ! Strengths of structural pultruded shapes--40 45% E-glass

and vinylester resin

Strength (Mpa)* Fiber direction Cross fiber direction

Tensile strength 207 48

(b)
Compressive strength 207 110
In-plane shear 38 38 Mathematical Idealizationof BoxCellsas SandwichPlate

* 1 M p a = 145 psi Figure 6 Pultruded deck section buckling modes and model

309
Analysis and design of FRP." M. A. Khalifa et al.

shear stress, the interaction equation defining the critical
stress state is given byi4:
<_ l
£71oc \O'lbc/2 \7-12c/2
where alo and aloc are the actual and the critical uniform
compressive stresses, respectively, aib and ~r~bc are the
actual and the critical pure bending stresses, respectively,
and ~-lz and "1-12c are the actual and the critical pure shear
stresses, respectively.
Uniform axial compression is the critical case. To
calculate the critical uniform compression buckling
stress for the box section shown in Figure 6a, a sandwich
plate idealization, as shown in Figure 6b, is assumed.
Consider the sandwich panel shown in Figure 6b having
face thickness of t and a core depth of C. The material
properties are defined as El, E 2, //12, /-'21 which are the
elastic moduli and Poisson's ratios in the fiber and cross
fiber directions, respectively, and G12, the in-plane shear
modulus of the orthotropic sandwich panel. The
uniformly compressive stress assuming simply supported
edges is defined asl5:
7rZKDI
trio- bZ~t
where:
@ = 1 -- VI2V21
K = ~
where: a/b = the ratio of the longer to the shorter panel
sides, and
7"f2 (m2b 2 n2 ~ rDI2 m4b4 012D2 n4
stiffness of the panel core in directions 1 and 2,
respectively, m and n are arbitrary positive integers.
The buckling stress of the multi-webbed box section is
determined for the case of uniaxial compressive stress. In
the uniaxial compression case, the recommended value
for n at minimum buckling load is unity. The flexural and
torsional stiffnesses of the box section are calculated
assuming the core's contribution to the panel stiffnesses
is limited to the panel's flexural stiffnesses only. More-
over, the core shear stiffness is calculated based on an
equivalent shear modulus for the overall core shear area.
Bulson 16 concluded that the effect on the critical stress
~1o will be negligible if the ratio DQ2/DQI is less than one
tenth in the case of the multi-webbed box section. There
is a direct proportional relation between the factor K and
the critical buckling stress as given by equation (3). From
equation (4b) it is also evident that the factor K is a
function of the aspect ratio of the panel dimensions. To
investigate the relation between the factor K and the
panel aspect ratio (a/b), equation (4b) is represented
graphically in Figure 7. It appears that there is a certain
aspect ratio at which the factor K reaches its minimum
value and this minimum value is almost the same
regardless of the value of the factor m. This means
(3)
that, for a certain material, specified dimension (b) and
specified thickness (t) the critical buckling stress (~1o)
will be approximately the same for any panel with aspect
(4a)
ratio larger than three. From the curves, the minimum
(4b) value of K is found to be 0.838; hence, the critical
uniform compressive stress trioc is calcualted to be
251.6MPa (36.5 ksi). All of the above quantities can be
calculated in a similar procedure as shown later for the
honeycomb alternative.

10
2m2n2b2 1 1 "m4b4 D2n4
-4 a2 (D2-v21D12) +~ -7-4 Di
J
m=15
2m2n2b2( D12@'~] (4c) 8 m=10
-4 a2 v21 + DI / j
m=7
and m=5 ....
6
71"4 D12Dlm4b4 + D12D2n4
2@BQ1BQ2 a4 v
2m2n2b2 ]
,+ ~-~ (DID2 -- DI2DIV21) 4 t
\
\
\
7r2m2b 2 //D 1 D12@'~ \

\\\\ ./
/ ./
2 \ ~.j- /
+ 7r'n ( 0 2 . O12@ `
@ BQ25-2--~QI)-F1 (4d)
04
where D 1 is the flexural stiffness of the panel in direction
1, D2 is the flexural stiffness of the panel in direction 2, 0 3 6 9 12
D12 is the torsional stiffness of the panel, BQI : b2. DQI ~b
and BQ2 : b 2" DQ2, where DQI and DO2 are the shear Figure 7 Panel buckling factor (k) for box section panels

310
 Analysis and design of FRP: M. A. Khalifa et al.

Intercellular local buckling of the multi-webbed box 2

panel. The intercellular buckling is checked for the T a ~-TopPlateR ..... d I 2
sectional element as described below. The plate is
•assumed to be simply supported on both sides of the T I L
cell (intersections with other sectional elements) as
recommended by Mosallam 17. The critical buckling o o/
stress of orthotropic plates under uniform compression
ItckZ,,Nr q/ I ,< I
O'interc is given byl4:
I • , 4 ' ,4
O-interc = 2.a-2 (D1D2) 0"5 q-D O
b2 t (5)
R AssumedSimply
SupportedAlongSides L,~ C -~
where D1 and D 2 are the flexural stiffness of the top plate PlanView SideView
in the main direction and in the perpendicular direction,
respectively. Do is the average torsional rigidity par-
ameter and is given by: q3 ~ 6 Y l

DO = 1 (v!2D2 + v21D1) + 2 ( G I ) l 2 (5a)

where (GI)I2 is the torsional rigidity of the face plate.

The value of the critical intercellular buckling stress ~12 f
O'interc in this case is 57.2 MPa (8.3 ksi).

Local buckling criteria jor the honeycomb bridge deck

The local buckling of a honeycomb sandwich struc-
ture includes the sandwich plate buckling under uniform
compression stress, linearly variable compression stress,
and shear stress. It also includes buckling due to face
wrinkling and dimpling through the honeycomb cells.
Panel local buckling. The previous procedure for
assessing the panel local buckling criteria of the sandwich
panel is also valid for studying the buckling strength of
the honeycomb structural plastic panels. Consider the
sandwich panel shown in Figure 8. The sandwich plate
has a face thickness of t and a core depth of C. The
core is composed of several longitudinal webs each of
tc thickness spaced at equal distances S as shown in
Figure 8. The stiffness parameters of the honeycomb
structural plastic panel with inclined rib tangents
(0 = 45 °) are given by (based on ref. 15 and modified
to take the inclined rib into account):
Elt(C + 02 (1 + sinO)Elt,C 3
D~ - 2 + 12S (6)
E2t(C + t) 2 (sinO)E2t,.C 3
D2 = 2 + 12S (7)
Ol 2 = GI2I(C +/)2 (8)
2Gl2tc (9)
Gavl - S
Gi2tc (10)
Gav2 = S is estimated using the equationl4:
AxisOrientation
Figure 8 Honeycomb deck cross-section
Similar analysis as in the case of multi-webbed box
girder gives critical buckling stress ~hoc of 477.1 MPa
(69.2 ksi) which was calculated by:
Plo
alo,. = (1 +sinO)tcC (13)
2t +
S
A comprehensive study is now being conducted to
evaluate the critical buckling load of such panels,
both analytically using, finite element analysis, and
experimentally.
Critical face wrinkling stress of honeycomb plate. The
critical face wrinkling stress is estimated by 14
Crwr= 0.5(EzfE3cGI2c) 1/3 (14)
where E2f, E3c are the face and the core elastic moduli,
respectively, and G12c is the core shear modulus as the
geometric mean of the average rigidity moduli of the
material in the two perpendicular directions 1 and 2.
The critical wrinkling stress for the deck section is
206.9 MPa (30.0 ksi).
Critical dimpling stress inside honeycomb cells. The
critical dimpling stress of the honeycomb plate's webs

Gavl(C+ t)2 (11)

DQ1 -- C = Res (15)

Gav2(C + t) 2 where R is a factor depending on the cell shape taken as

DQ2 -- C (12) three 14, d is the cell inscribed circle's diameter, Er is the

311
Analysis and design of FRP: M. A. Khalifa et al.
geometric mean of the facing moduli of elasticity in the
two perpendicular directions (l and 2). The resulting
value is 11 GPa (1,600 ksi).
Stiffness criteria
The modulus of elasticity, E, and the Poisson's ratio,
v, are the two elastic constants sufficient to describe the
stiffness properties of isotropic materials. However, at
least three material constants are required to describe the
stiffness properties of orthotropic laminates; namely, El,
E2, vl2, where 1 denotes the fiber direction and 2 denotes
the cross fiber direction. Young's modulus, flexural
modulus, and shear modulus for FRPs are directional
quantities. Their values in the fiber directions are much
higher than their values perpendicular to the fibers as
shown in Table 2; therefore, structures made of FRPs are
more flexible than conventional structures. It is also
recommended to take shear deformations into account
when calculating deflections under lateral loads. The
light weight of the material (approximately one fifth the
weight of steel) does not compensate for the low value of
Young's modulus (approximately one tenth Young's
modulus of steel). On the contrary, the light weight
material makes the structural response more live-J~ad
dependent (the live-load/dead-load ratio for ,(?
structures varies from three to five; while the same
ratio for conventional structures varies from one to two).
This makes meeting deflection limits set by the AASHTO
1984 code more difficult. The high live-load/dead-load
ratio, particularly in cable-stayed bridges, causes slack-
ness of some cables when the bridge is fully loaded. If
prestressing forces in the cables are high enough to
prevent the cable slackness, they might cause undesirable
upward deflection. These situations may be avoided if
the structure is provided with a suitable ballast load. For
a long span structure such as a cable-stayed bridge, non-
linearity due to large deflections and moment-normal
force interaction might generally be magnified by a low
modulus of elasticity.
Kevlar cables have Young's modulus of 124.11 GPa
(18 000 ksi). This Young's modulus value is approximately
one-half of that of steel tendons.
Long term behavior
FRPs are a mixture of fibers and resin. This
combination, behaves in a manner similar to viscous
fluids under normal loading conditions. Stiffness of FRP
Table 2 Elastic constants ofpultruded structural shapes--40 45% E-
glass and vinylester resin
Young's Flexural Shear
modulus modulus modulus Poisson's
Direction (GPa)* (GPa) (GPa) ratio
Fiber 17.24 11.03 2.93 0.33
Cross fiber 5.52 5.52 2.93 0.11
* Gpa = 145,000 psi
312
members reduces with time. Their maximum strength
depends on the sustained stress and the time. The
Structural Plastics Design Manual 14 suggests that the
elastic moduli of most FRP's are reduced to one-half
their short term values after 10 years. The viscoelastic
behavior can be assumed to be linear under moderate
stress levels. The linearity limit of the viscoelastic
behavior of GFRP members (first damage strength) is
indicated by a slope change in the time dependent stress-
strain relationship for GFRP at certain point of time
(isochronous curve). Beyond the viscoelastic limit simple
linear stress-strain relationship is not valid and the time
dependent strain will increase in a non-linear fashion
leading to the creep rupture failure of the structure.
Thus, it is required to keep the sustained stresses below
the first damage stress. It is also mandatory to ensure
that under the sustained stress the material strength will
still be higher than the first damage strength.
Factor of safety
The working strength design method is used in this
preliminary design stage of the proposed Lincoln
Composite Bridge. An overall factor of safety of five is
adopted to determine the working strength of the
material. This value of the factor of safety is adopted
in the design of Polyvinyl Chloride pipes 14. A more
rigorous approach to determine the factor of safety
would be to construct the isochronous curves for the
construction material and determine the viscoelastic
limit which will represent the working strength of the
material. It also should be ensured that the viscoelastic
limit is less than the creep strength of the material at the
end of the service life of the bridge. There were no
available data to construct such curves. An investigation
into this aspect is currently being undertaken to
rationalize the choice of the factor of safety.
ANALYSIS PROCEDURE
Modelling
A 3-D model of the proposed structure was developed
for linear and non-linear static and dynamic analyses of
the bridge structure. The different sources of non-
linearities considered in the analysis are: (1) change of
geometry due to large deflections of the deck and the
towers; (2) cable sag, and (3) normal force-moment
interaction in the deck and the towers. The model used to
perform the global analysis of the bridge structure is
depicted in Figure 9. The deck is represented by two
longitudinal 3-D spines. The two spines are arranged in
such a way that they preserve the stiffness and inertial
characteristics of the deck cross section. Cross beams are
used in this model to retain the geometry of the model
and provide the cable anchor points on the deck. The
towers are modeled as 3-D diamond shape frames. The
cables are assumed to be truss elements. A flexible deck-
tower connection is assumed in this model. This connection
 Analysis and design of FRP. M. A. Khalifa et al.

O0
o
y ~ Cable type

m m
Cable type 1

y
1

76.2 m .2. 121.92 m J~, 76.2 m

-1-- 4

t very stiff
members
\
2
m

v.,
\ spine ~
(m, I, J, Ira)
Section A-A

axially
stiff
members 2

\
- A,, I t, m,

Figure 9 Analyticalmodel of the Lincolncompositebridge

permits relative longitudinal motion in the global 1
direction and relative rotations around the global 2 and 3
axes between the d e c k and the towers. This type of
connection is easier to achieve on site and reduces
stresses on the towers. The deck ends are assumed to be
hinged to the abutments 18. Ohtsuka et al. showed that
having roller supports at the deck ends causes high
normal forces in the deck which is an undesirable
situation especially in the case of G F R P decks. The
cross-sectional properties of the different model mem-
bers are given in Table 3. An in-house F O R T R A N code
and two commercial analysis packages, SAP 90 and
ANSYS, are used to perform the static and dynamic
analyses of the described model.

313
Analysis and design of FRP: M. A. Khalifa et al.

Table 3 Preliminary cross-sectional properties of the different members of the proposed Lincoln composite bridge
Minor moment Major moment
Cross-sectional area Torsional constant J of inertia, 12 of inertia, 13 Weight
Element (m:)* (m4) (m4) (m4) (N/m)/
Deck 0.132 0.0463 0.0159 0.255 2324.4
Tower 0.138 0.0J32 0.0216 0.0216 2459.1
Cable 1 0.00014 __A -- -- 2.29
Cable 2 0.00126 -- -- 33.6
* 1 m = 39.4 in.
t 1N/n~ = 0.0685 lb/ft
+ = non applicable

Table 4 Frequencies and mode shapes of Lincoln composite bridge

Total effective modal mass %
Mode Number Frequency (Hz) Classification Longitudinal Vertical Lateral
1 0.333774 Lateral 0.000 0.000 28.057
2 0.922826 Vertical 0.331 0.000 28.057
3 0.952885 Vertical 0.331 0.210 28.057
4 0.957955 Lateral 0.331 0.210 28.057
5 1,215660 Vertical 1.985 0.210 28.057
6 1.279454 Vertical 1.985 50.691 28.057
7 1,358655 Lateral 1.985 50.691 77.420
8 1.367418 Lateral 1.985 50.691 77.420
9 1.618138 Lateral 1.985 50.961 77.420
10 1.748616 Vertical 1.985 50.961 78.432
11 1.835659 Vertical 7.859 50.961 78.432
12 2.024624 Vertical 7.859 50.825 78.432
13 2.070559 Lateral 7.859 50.825 78.432
14 2.077501 Vertical 9.265 50.825 78.432
15 2.307408 Vertical 9.265 57.653 78.432
16 2.3249 ! 0 Lateral 9.265 57,653 79.265
17 2.577662 Vertical 22.947 57.653 79.265
18 2.876022 Longitudinal 76.451 57.653 79.265
19 2.973663 Lateral 76.451 57.654 79.265
20 3.111099 Vertical 76.451 59.119 79.265
21 3.210249 Vertical 81.219 59.119 79.265
22 3.342047 Lateral 81.219 59.119 79.545
23 3.438177 Vertical 81.219 65.291 79.545
24 3.591820 Lateral 81.219 65.291 79.545
25 3.839119 Vertical 84.535 65.291 79.545
26 3.908952 Torsional 84.535 65.291 79.620
27 4.064022 Longitudinal 84.535 65.310 79.620
28 4.065624 Torsional 84.537 65.310 79.620
29 4.068208 Vertical 84.537 65.310 79.786
30 4.398722 Lateral 84.537 65.310 81.211

A s e p a r a t e o r t h o t r o p i c plate analysis is p e r f o r m e d to flooring weight o f 2 . 9 K n / m (2001b/ft) is r e q u i r e d to

s t u d y the local l o a d d i s t r i b u t i o n on the deck. The local
stability o f the different bridge m e m b e r s was also studied
using o r t h o t r o p i c plate analysis as discussed earlier in
this paper.
Static loads'
The analysis is started by trial sections for the deck
a n d towers. The cables cross-sections are d e t e r m i n e d
accordingly. The d e a d weight o f the deck a n d the
flooring is calculated to be 3.4 k N / m (230 lb/ft).
T h e A m e r i c a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f State H i g h w a y a n d
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Officials 19 s t a n d a r d loadings are a p p l i e d
to the model. A m a x i m u m d i s t r i b u t e d live-load o f
4 1 4 . 5 N / m 2 (851b/ft 2) is used. M a n y live-load cases
were investigated to d e t e r m i n e the critical live-load
configuration. The deck flooring weight a n d cable pre-
tension forces are modified to prevent cable slackness. A
achieve this result. C a b l e pre-tension forces o f 267 K n
(60kip) in cables d e s i g n a t e d as C a b l e 2 a n d 8 0 K n
(18kip) in cables d e s i g n a t e d as C a b l e 1 are required
(Figure 9). Static wind l o a d i n g was a p p l i e d a c c o r d i n g to
the A A S H T O specifications. T h e r m a l l o a d s are also
investigated. The t h e r m a l effects are significant for long
structures a n d especially c a b l e - s t a y e d bridges. A tem-
p e r a t u r e change o f 83°C (150°F) is considered in the
analysis. Also, a t e m p e r a t u r e g r a d i e n t within the struc-
tural m e m b e r s o f 93°C/m (50°F/ft) is studied. A differ-
ence in t e m p e r a t u r e between cables a n d o t h e r bridge
m e m b e r s o f l l ° C (20°F) is also considered. L o a d
c o m b i n a t i o n s as per A A S H T O specifications are used
to d e t e r m i n e the m o s t critical stresses.
T o a c c o u n t for creep, r e d u c e d elastic m o d u l i o f F R P s
are used in the long term analysis o f the bridge. Effects o f
t e m p e r a t u r e and h u m i d i t y changes on the long term
m e c h a n i c a l p r o p e r t i e s o f the c o n s t r u c t i o n m a t e r i a l are

314
 Analysis and design of FRP: M. A. Khalifa et al.

assumed to be included in the reduced elastic moduli of required careful analysis for the bridge response under all
FRPs, The short term and the long term stresses envelopes possible dynamic loads.
are developed. In both cases the in-plane strength of the The dynamic effects of walking pedestrians on the
material is not exceeded. The maximum normal stress in vertical and lateral bridge response are considered. Allen
both cases is less than 41.4Mpa (6.0ksi) which complies and Murray2° suggested that the effect of moving pedes-
with the overall factor of safety adopted for this project. trians can be represented by a Fourier series in the form
of
Dynamic loads F = P(1 + ~c~icos 27rtfT) (17)
Dynamic analysis is conducted to provide the basic where P is the person's weight taken as 0.7Kn (1601b)
dynamic characteristics of the bridge. Eigenvalue analy- for design, f is the step frequency (assumed 2.0 Hz), i is
sis is conducted to determine the lowest 80 modes and the the harmonic multiple, oq is a dynamic coefficient
associated frequencies. Table 4 provides a list of the first (participation factor) for the harmonic as given in
30 modes and the corresponding frequencies. The first Table 5, and T is the elapsed time. The harmonic terms
two fundamental modes are shown in Figure 10. There is with harmonic multipliers higher than unity are not
evident spatial coupling in most of the calculated modes. likely to excite the bridge because their frequencies are
The deck motion is coupled to the tower motion through higher than the frequencies of the effective vertical bridge
the cables. The transverse and torsional motions of the modes. These effective vertical bridge modes are the ones
deck are also coupled. In addition, many modes have with high modal mass up to 65% of the cumulative mass
closely spaced frequencies. These dynamic characteristics in the vertical direction 3 as shown in Table 4. Thus, the

Mode 1

[.~ [. .i . IL . It . t .r I I , -a"t -~""1 , II II I'i II I[ I1 I I ! L ! i a tl sl H . . . . . r _ , i i i i i ii ii ii -i ] i

Mode 2
Figure 10 The first two fundamental mode shapes

31 5
Analysis and design of FRP. M. A. Khalifa et al.
first two terms of the series are only used in the analysis
of the dynamic effects of walking. The maximum vertical
acceleration due to walking at the mid point of the bridge
is found to be 0.3 g. Special damping devices are being
investigated to be installed to reduce the maximum
vertical deck acceleration to a more human tolerable
value. Fujino et al. 2 proved that walking has an effect in
the lateral direction. The lateral force amplitude is 10%
of the vertical force amplitude and the frequency is
usually lower (1.0 Hz). The bridge is analyzed under the
effect of these dynamic forces assuming congested
condition. The maximum lateral deck acceleration is
found to be 0.125 g which is within the tolerable range of
humans.
Four forms of wind induced vibrations of the bridge
are studied; namely, vortex shedding, galloping, flutter,
and buffeting. The vortex shedding response U3v is
governed by the equation22:
1 rcpU2Hu3sCL
U3v - 2 0.03Ws
where p is the air density, U is the wind speed, H is the
deck depth, Ws is the static load on the deck, c L is the lift
coefficient, a value of 0.4 is taken here 22, and u3s is the
deflection due to the static load Ws.
The maximum vortex amplitude is found to be 6 mm
(0.22 in) for a maximum deflection of the main span of
0.15 m (0.5 ft) under a static load of 17.5 Kn/m (1200 lb/
ft). The galloping and flutter are forms of instability. The
galloping response U3G is governed by the following
equation 23:
M/~3G + 2M~cotJ3G + ksu36 = ½PU2HCy
where M is the deck mass/unit length, ¢ is the percentage
of critical damping of the bridge, w is a bridge frequency,
ks is the bridge stiffness, Cy is an aerodynamic stability
coefficient. The stability condition is given by:
OCy
< o
where a is the angle of attack. The stability condition of
equation (20) is satisfied for any bridge deck with width/
depth ratio greater than four 23.
The flutter response u3f is calculated according to the
relation 22:
M 1992, 45(2), 263
t , / 3 f - PTrB2
where B is l~alf the deck width. The maximum flutter
response u3f is found to be 0.83m (32.6in). The critical
TaMe 5 Loading function for walking
Harmonic Frequency range Dynamic load factor
i i x f (Hz) ch
1 1.6 2.2 0.5
2 3.2 4.4 0.2
3 4.8-6.6 0.1
4 6.4-8.8 0.05
316
flutter speed is 235 km/hr (146mph) which is 1.5 of the
design wind speed for the bridge location.
Standard random vibration approach is used to study
the buffeting response of the bridge. The bridge's
maximum buffeting deflection uzb is estimated to be
0.4m (16in).
Based on the dynamic analyses, it seems that the
proposed deck and tower cross sections are adequate for
the serviceability of the bridge. These results will be
verified by wind tunnel tests. Dampers can be introduced
at the deck tower connection and at the abutments for
pedestrian comfort. Complete dynamic analyses will be
furnished in a separate publication.
CONCLUSIONS
We describe the analysis and design methodology for
F R P bridges and how they applied it to the first proposed
(18)
US FRP cable-stayed pedestrian bridge. Criteria for the
FRPs' strength and stiffness in the short and long term
are established. These criteria take into account the
orthotropy of the FRPs' properties. An overall factor of
safety of five is adopted. More rigorous procedures to
determine the factor of safety are now being investigated.
Three dimensional finite element analysis of the bridge
model is adopted and the short term and long term
behaviors of the bridge under static loads are studied.
Dynamic effects of moving loads and wind loads are
studied and the deck accelerations are designed to be
controlled to the maximum tolerable human limit.
(19)
REFERENCES
l Podolny, W., Jr. and Scalzi, J. 'Construction and Design of
Cable-Stayed Bridges', John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1986
2 Carlsson, L. A. and Pipes, R. B. 'Experimental Characterization
of Advanced Composite Materials', Prentice-Hall, Englewood
(20)
Cliffs, New Jersey, 1987
3 Nagaraj,V. and GangaRao, H. V. S. Characterizationof GFRP
pultruded box beams under static and fatigue loads. SAMPE
Quarterly, 1993, 3-9
4 Sotiropoulos,S. N., GangaRao, H. V. S. and Mongi, A. N. K.
Theoretical and ExperimentalEvaluationof FRP Components
and Systems.J. Struct. Engng 1994, 120(2),464
5 Barbero,E. J. A 3-D finite element for laminated composites
with 2-D kinematic constraints. Computers and Structures
(21) 6 Mosallam,A. 'Connectionsand ReinforcementDesign Details
for Pultruded Fiber Reinforced Plastic (PFRP) Composite
Structures', 49th Annual Conference,Composite Institute, The
Societyof Plastic Industry, Inc., 8(E), 1994, p. 1
7 Seible,F., Sun, Z, and Ma, G. Glass Fiber ReinforcedPlasticsof
China. Report No. ACTT-93/01, Universityof California, San
Diego, La Jolla, California, 1993
8 Head,P. R. Design Methods and Bridge Forms for the Cost
EffectiveUse of AdvancedCompositesin BridgesIn "Advanced
Composite materials in Bridges and Structures', Sherbrooke,
Quebec, Canada, 1992,p. 15
9 Seible,F., Hegemier,G. A. and Nagy, G. The AberfeldyGlass
Fiber Composite Pedestrian Bridge. Report No. ACTT-94/01,
University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, 1994
10 Leonhardt,F. and Zellner, W. 'Cable-StayedBridges', IABSE
Surveys 13/80, 1980,p. 21
11 GangaRao,H. V. S. and Sotiropoulos, S. N. Developmentof

FRP Bridge Super Structural Systems. Report No. CFC 91-101,
West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, 1991
12 'Design Guide' Creative Pultrusion Inc., Alum Bank, Pennsyl-
vania, 1988
13 "Design Manual" Morrison Molded Fiber Glass Company
(MMFG), Bristol, Virginia, 1989
14 Heger, F. J., Chambers, R. E. and Dietz, A. G. H. 'Structural
Plastics Design Manual, ASCE. Manual of Engineering Practice
No. 63', American Society of Civil Engineers. New York, 1984
15 Allen, H. G. 'Analysis and Design of Structural Sandwich
Panels', Pergamon Press, London, 1969
16 Bulson, P. S. 'The Stability of Flat Plates', American Elsevier
Publ. Co., New York, 1969
17 Mosallam, A. Short and long-term behavior of pultruded fiber-
reinforced plastic frame. Ph.D. Thesis, Catholic University of
America, Washington, District of Columbia
18 Ohtsuka, H., Ohta, T. and lmai, F. Optimum Anchoring for
Analysis and design of FRP. M. A. Khalifa et al.
long span cable-stayed bridges. Proc. Japanese Society of Civil
Engineers, 1984, 1(2), 87
19 Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges. In 'American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO)', Washington, District of Colombia, 1984
20 Allen, D. E. and Murray, T. M. Vibration of Composite floors.
Structural engineering in natural hazards mitigation. Proc.
Syrup. of Structural Engineering" Natural Hazard Mitigation,
1993, ASCE, pp 1491 1496
21 Fujino, Y., Pacheco, B., Nakamura, S. and Warnitchai, P. Syn-
chronization of human walking observed during lateral vibra-
tion of a congested pedestrian bridge. Earthquake Engineering
and Structural Dynamics, 1993, 22, 741
22 Rene, W., Bernard, H., Walmar, I. and Pierre, M. ~Cable-Stayed
Bridges', Thomas Telford, London, 1988
23 Blevins, R. D. 'Flow Induced Vibrations', Van Nostrand Rein-
hold, New York, 1990
31 7