Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering 22 (2007) 358–366

Nonlinear Analysis of Steel Cable-Stayed Bridges

Weon-Keun Song∗
Manager, Korea Infrastructure Safety and Technology Corporation, Korea

Seung-Eock Kim
Professor of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Construction Technology Research Institute,
Sejong University, Korea

&

Sang Soo Ma
Researcher, Korea Infrastructure Safety and Technology Corporation, Korea

Abstract: In this study, a nonlinear inelastic analysis
model using a softening plastic-hinge approach is pro-
posed for predicting the ultimate load-carrying capacity
of steel cable-stayed bridges. The ultimate load-carrying
capacity analysis is done starting from the initial shape de-
termination due to bridge dead load. The proposed model
can consider both geometric and material nonlinearities
in the nonlinear inelastic analysis for the example bridges.
The load–displacement curves of the example bridges pre-
dicted by both the proposed model and the commercial
code ABAQUS are compared with each other to verify the
accuracy of solutions. Identical solutions between them
are found. A parametric study on the example bridges is
presented and their ultimate behavior is discussed.
1 INTRODUCTION
Over many years, research efforts have been devoted
to the development of nonlinear inelastic analysis mod-
els for cable-stayed bridges. It is well known that cable-
stayed bridges are composed of complex structural
components with high nonlinearities. The nonlinearities
such as (1) the nonlinear axial force-elongation behavior
∗ To
whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: bauman98@
hanmail.net.
for the inclined cable stays due to the sag initiated by
their own weight (sag effect); (2) the combined axial
force and bending moment interaction for the girder and
the pylons; (3) the large displacement, which is produced
by the geometric change of structure; (4) the nonlin-
ear stress–strain behavior of each structural component
(including yielding) should be included in nonlinear in-
elastic analysis. Geometric nonlinearities come from the
cable sag, the axial force-bending moment interaction,
and the large displacement. Material nonlinearities arise
when one or more bridge elements exceed their elastic
limits due to member forces (axial forces or combined
axial forces and bending moments). Some researchers
disregarded all sources of nonlinearities (e.g., Krishna
et al. (1985)), whereas others included one or more of
these sources. Most nonlinear analyses of cable-stayed
bridges have focused on plane (Fleming (1979)) or space
(Kanok-Nukulchai and Guan (1993); Boonyapinyo et al.
(1994)) geometric nonlinear behavior. But some analy-
ses (Nakai et al. (1985); Seif and Dilger (1990)) involved
with both geometric and material nonlinearities revealed
that the material nonlinearities were dominant in the
nonlinear static behavior of cable-stayed bridges. Their
works were focused on concrete cable-stayed bridges.
Adeli and Zhang (1995) dealt with full nonlinear analy-
sis for composite girder cable-stayed bridges.


C 2007 Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA,
and 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK.
 Nonlinear analysis of steel cable-stayed bridges 359

Cable stays, girder, and pylons are the main structural analyzed to verify the feasibility. A parametric study on
components of cable-stayed bridges. The behavior of the example bridges and their ultimate behavior analysis
girder and pylons can be described using beam-column are presented in this investigation.
members in finite displacement analysis. Nonlinear in-
elastic analysis models for beam-column members may
be grouped into several categories: plastic-hinge, fiber el- 2 SOFTENING PLASTIC-HINGE MODEL
ement, and plastic-zone models. The plastic-hinge model
was developed by Orbison (1982), Prakash and Powell 2.1 Stability functions
(1993), and Liew and Tang (1998). Orbison’s approach
was an elastic-plastic hinge analysis, wherein geomet- To capture geometric nonlinearity, stability functions are
ric nonlinearity was considered by a geometric stiffness used to minimize modeling and solution time. The stabil-
matrix and material nonlinearity was by the tangent ity functions date back to Fleming (1979). Others (Kim
modulus. The DRAIN-3DX developed by Prakash and and Chen, 1996a; Kim and Chen, 1996b) have used the
Powell was a modified version of the plastic-hinge mod- stability functions in a number of more recent publica-
els. In here, the geometric nonlinearity caused by the ax- tions for a three-dimensional beam-column element. The
ial forces was considered by the use of a geometric stiff- stability functions may be written by Equation (1) as:
ness matrix, but the nonlinearity caused by the axial force for P > 0
and the bending moment interaction was not considered. √ √ √
π 2 ρ y cosh(π ρ y ) − π ρ y sinh(π ρ y )
Liew and Tang’s model was a refined plastic-hinge anal- S1 = √ √ √ (1a)
ysis approach in which the effect of residual stresses was 2 − 2 cosh(π ρ y ) + π ρ y sinh(π ρ y )
taken into account in conventional beam-column finite
element modeling. Nonlinear material behavior was also √ √
π ρ y sinh(π ρ y ) − π 2 ρ y
taken into account by calibration of inelastic parameters S2 = √ √ √ (1b)
2 − 2 cosh(π ρ y ) + π ρ y sinh(π ρ y )
describing the yield and bounding surfaces.
In another respect, some investigators presented dif- √ √ √
ferent analysis approaches involved with the fiber ele- π 2 ρ cosh(π ρz) − π ρz sinh(π ρz)
S3 = √ √ √ (1c)
ment model to deal with cable-stayed bridges. Seif and 2 − 2 cosh(π ρz) + π ρz sinh(π ρz)
Dilger (1990) established the instantaneous properties of
a cross section subjected to the axial forces and the bend- √ √
π ρz sinh(π ρz) − π 2 ρz
ing moments in an iterative process in which the cross S4 = √ √ √ (1d)
section was considered to consist of fiber elements (thin 2 − 2 cosh(π ρz) + π ρz sinh(π ρz)
layers), each subjected to a different stress. Therefore,
it was possible for each layer in a cross section to have for P > 0
√ √ √
a different level of stiffness. Ren (1999) also calculated π ρ y sin(π ρ y ) − π 2 ρ y cos(π ρ y )
the ultimate load-carrying capacity of concrete cable- S1 = √ √ √ (1e)
2 − 2 cos(π ρ y ) − π ρ y sin(π ρ y )
stayed bridges using the fiber element model. However,
he conducted the nonlinear inelastic analysis suppos- √ √
ing the pylons to be elastic throughout. El-Zanaty and π 2 ρ y − π ρ y sin(π ρ y )
S2 = √ √ √ (1f)
Murray (1983) developed the plastic-zone model known 2 − 2 cos(π ρ y ) − π ρ y sin(π ρ y )
as the “exact solution” considering the spread of the in-
elastic zone along the member length as well as the grad- √ √ √
π ρz sin(π ρz) − π 2 ρz cos(π ρz)
ual yielding of a cross section. S3 = √ √ √ (1g)
Unfortunately, these numerical studies on the appli- 2 − 2 cos(π ρz) − π ρz sin(π ρz)
cation of the plastic-hinge model have limited their fo-
√ √
cus on the frame structures only. In this current study, π 2 ρz − π ρz sin(π ρz)
the softening plastic-hinge model considering both geo- S4 = √ √ √ (1h)
2 − 2 cos(π ρz) − π ρz sin(π ρz)
metric and material nonlinearities are successfully set up    
to predict the ultimate load-carrying capacity of cable- where, ρ y = P (π 2 EIy L2 ), ρz = P (π 2 EIz L2 ), and
stayed bridges. The ultimate load observed at the limit the axial force P is positive in tension; E is the Young’s
point of the load-displacement curve is actually the ul- modulus; I y and I Z are the moments of inertia about y
timate load-carrying capacity of a total structure. The and z axes, respectively; L is the element length.
ultimate behaviors predicted by the softening plastic- The numerical solutions obtained from Equations
hinge model and the commercial code ABAQUS (Hib- (1a–1h) are indeterminate when the axial force is zero.
bitt, Karlsson, and Sorensen (2001)) are comparatively The stability function approach uses only one element
360 Song, Kim & Ma

per member and maintains accuracy in the element stiff- α 0 = 0.5. If the forces change so the force point moves
ness terms and in the recovery of element end forces for inside or along the initial yield surface, the element is as-
all ranges of axial loads. sumed to remain fully elastic with no stiffness reduction.
If the force point moves beyond the initial yield surface,
2.2 Gradual yielding due to axial forces the element stiffness is reduced to account for the effect
of plastification at the element end.
The softening plastic-hinge model is used to account for
gradual yielding (due to the residual stresses) along the
length of axially loaded beam-column members between
3 CABLE SAG EFFECT
plastic-hinges with the CRC tangent modulus (Et ) con-
cept. From Chen and Lui (1992), the CRC tangent mod-
Cable stay is assumed to be perfectly flexible and to pos-
ulus is written as:
sess tension stiffness only. It is well known that inclined
Et = 1.0E for P ≤ 0.5Py (2a) cable stays of cable-stayed bridges will sag into a cate-
  nary shape due to its own weight. The tension stiffness
P P
Et = 4 E 1 − for P > 0.5Py (2b) of a cable stay varies depending on the sag that can be
Py Py conveniently modeled by using an equivalent straight
where, Py is the axial yield force. truss element with an equivalent modulus of elasticity.
The element can well describe the catenary action of a
2.3 Gradual plastification due to the combined axial cable stay. The tangent value of the equivalent modulus
forces and bending moments of elasticity was first proposed by Ernst (1965) and then
used by Fleming (1979). In this article, the cable sag ef-
The CRC tangent modulus concept is suitable for beam-
fect is considered by the use of the secant value of the
column members subjected to axial forces, but not ad-
equivalent modulus of elasticity. When the tension in the
equate for cases of both axial forces and bending mo-
cable element changed from T 0c to T 1c during the applica-
ments. A gradual stiffness degradation model for a
tion of a certain load increment, the secant value of the
plastic-hinge is required to represent the partial plas-
equivalent modulus of elasticity over the load increment
tification effects associated with bending. The parabolic
was used by Gimsing (1983), Nazmy and Abdel-Ghaffar
function (η) that is expressed by Equation (3) is intro-
(1990) etc. as follows:
duced to represent the transition from elastic to zero
stiffness associated with a developing hinge as follows: Ec
Eeq =  2  0  (5)
η = 1.0 for α ≤ 0.5 (3a) · lc Tc + Tc1
wcL
1+  2  2 Ec Ac
η = 4α(1 − α) for α > 0.5 (3b) 24 Tc0 Tc1
where α is a force-state parameter that measures the in which Eeq is the equivalent modulus; Ec is the Young’s
magnitude of axial force and bending moment at the modulus of the cable; l c is the horizontal projected length
element end. The term α was expressed by AISC-LRFD of the cable; wL
c is the weight per unit length of the cable;
(2001). Based on the AISC-LRFD bilinear interaction Ac is the cross sectional area of the cable; T c is the cable
equation, the cross section plastic strength of the beam- tension.
column member may be expressed as:
P 8 My 8 Mz P 2 My 2 Mz
α= + + for ≥ + 4 FINITE ELEMENT MODELING
Py 9 Myp 9 Mzp Py 9 Myp 9 Mzp
OF EXAMPLE BRIDGE
(4a)
This section introduces the finite element three-
P My Mz P 2 My 2 Mz dimensional modeling of the example bridge. Figure 1
α= + + for < +
2Py Myp Mzp Py 9 Myp 9 Mzp shows the configuration for the example bridge, and the
numberings of nodes and of cable elements. Each ca-
(4b) ble stay consists of an equivalent straight truss element.
where, My , Mz, Myp and Mzp are the bending moments The girder and the pylons are modeled using a number
and the plastic bending moments about y and z axes, of beam-column members. Each cable stay is connected
respectively. with pins at the girder and the pylons. It is a fact that
Initial yielding is assumed to occur based on a yield the behavior of cable-stayed bridges depends highly on
surface that has the same shape as the full plastification the manner in which the bridge girder is connected to the
surface and with the force-state parameter denoted as pylons and other piers. The floating system, which has no
 Nonlinear analysis of steel cable-stayed bridges 361

(unit : m) (Fan Type)

Z
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (20) (19) (18) (17) (16) (15) (14) (13) (12) (11)
X

9@6.1 = 54.9 10@6.1 = 61.0 10@6.1 = 61.0 9@6.1 = 54.9

(Girder)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
Y

7.32
X 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78

85 92 99 106

18 4@3.0
84 91 98 105
83 90 97 104
82 89 96 103
81 88 95 102

Z 80 87 94 101

10
79 86 93 100
Y
7.50
t=0.05 t=0.05
(Sections)

HG
H

W21X44 CD
1.0 1.0
(Pylon) (Girder) (Cross beam) (Cable)

Fig. 1. FE modeling of the example bridge.

restraint between the girder and the pylons, permits the Configuration Before
girder of the example bridge to swing freely between the Deformation
pylons. All other supports of the side piers to the girders
are simply supported. The floating system increases the
ultimate load-carrying capacity of cable-stayed bridges
under static loadings due to the reduction of bending Geometric Nonlinear Analysis
moments in the girder (Seif and Dilger, 1990).
The stress–strain curve for beam-column members
such as the girder, the pylon and the cross beams is as- Change of Cable Tension &
sumed to be elastic-perfectly plastic with elastic mod- Initial Target Shape
Updated Structural Configuration
ulus of 207 GPa and the yield stress of 248 MPa. The
stress–strain relationship for cable members should be
valid within the elastic limit of the material with elastic
NO
modulus of 158.6 GPa and the yield stress of 1,103 MPa. SOD ≤ ε
The weight per unit volume of the girder, the pylons and
the cross beams is 76.8 kN/m3 . One of the cable stays YES
is 60.5 kN/m3 . The self-weight of the main members is
applied on the girder and the pylons in the initial shape END
analysis. The dead, the live and the impact loads spec-
ified in AASHTO-LRFD (1998), which have the load Fig. 2. Initial shape analysis procedure.
factors of 1.25, 1.75, and 0.33, respectively, are used in
the nonlinear inelastic analysis.
cable tensions obtained from the initial shape analysis.
The initial cable tensions are used for the secant value of
5 NONLINEAR ANALYSIS PROCEDURE
the equivalent modulus of elasticity of the cable mem-
bers, which describe the sag effect, in the nonlinear in-
5.1 Initial shape analysis
elastic analysis. Figure 2 shows the procedure of the non-
The nonlinear inelastic analysis for the example bridges linear initial shape analysis. At the first shape iterative
is done starting with the initial shapes and the initial step (NSI = 1, number of shape iteration), the nonlinear
362 Song, Kim & Ma

initial shape analysis is performed under the dead loads.
The cable tensions are not considered at this step. At the
second step (NSI = 2), the analysis is performed consid-
ering the cable tensions and the updated structural con-
figuration, having the reverse displacements, captured
from the first shape iterative step. The secant values of
the equivalent cable modulus of elasticity increase as the
cable tensions change. The shape differences between
the updated structural configurations and the configura-
tion before deformation are gradually eliminated at ev-
ery shape iterative step. Finally, the updated structural
configurations converge toward the target shape (the
initial shape) during the iteration procedure. The sub-
iteration procedure at every shape iterative step contin-
ues until the sum of the total nodal displacement (SOD)
becomes less than the convergence tolerance (ε) (see
Equation (6)). When SOD is calculated, the reference
coordinates are the ones of the configuration before de-
formation of the example bridge.
N 

SOD = Ui2X + UiY
2
+ Ui2Z ≤ ε (6)
i=1
element establishes the instantaneous properties of a
cross section subjected to both axial forces and bending
moments in an iterative process. In this process, the cross
section is considered to consist of some fiber elements,
each subjected to different stresses, thereby making it
possible for each fiber element to have a different stiff-
ness. When a fiber element at a given integration point
exceeds the yield limit of material in the elastic-perfectly
plastic curve, the element stiffness matrix is gradually
revised to form the elastic-plastic stiffness matrix. The
large displacement is also considered by the geometric
stiffness matrix and the geometric change effect in the
total structure is reflected by recomposing the tangent
stiffness matrix at every iterative step. The commercial
code ABAQUS utilizes the arc-length method.
The load ratio means the proportion of the ultimate
load to the applied factored load in this article through-
out. The applied factored load is increased by the same
ratio as in the initial shape and in the nonlinear inelastic
analyses.

where, N is the number of nodes; U iX , U iY , and U iZ are 6 VERIFICATIONS

the displacements at the node i along the X, Y, and Z
global axes. The iteration procedure for the initial shape In this section, the results obtained in the proposed anal-
determination is continued until the SOD equals or is ysis and the analysis by the commercial code ABAQUS
less than 1.0 m at the 3rd shape iterative step. are compared with each other to verify the accuracy of
solutions. The example bridge (see Figure 1) has the
girder depth (H G ) of 1.0 m, the pylon depth (H P ) of 2.0 m
5.2 Inelastic nonlinear analysis and the cable diameter (CD ) of 0.07 m. Figure 3 illus-
trates the load-displacement curves for the main mem-
The configuration and cable tensions of the example
bers of the example bridge obtained by the proposed
bridge should be initiated at the first iterative step in the
model and the commercial code ABAQUS. The curves
nonlinear inelastic analysis. The softening plastic-hinge
are made considering the reverse displacement of the
model utilizes the direct iteration method. In the algo-
example bridge, which is captured from the initial shape,
rithm, the effective load increment size near the limit
as the reference coordinates. The example bridge fails at
point of the load-displacement curve should be deter-
mined to minimize the error when the element stiffness
is changed. The element stiffness formation accounts for
the stiffness reduction caused by the gradual yielding
or the presence of the plastic-hinge in the incremental
loads. The algorithm calculates the incremental displace-
ments corresponding to the applied incremental loads
at every iterative step and the new plastic-hinges can
be developed prior to the full application of the incre-
mental loads. The algorithm informs the users of the
overall structural collapse at the limit point for the non-
positive definiteness of the structural stiffness matrix.
The stiffness matrix is recomposed considering the ge-
ometric change of the example bridge at every itera-
tive step. B33 element, having three integration points
in an element, is used in the commercial code ABAQUS
for the nonlinear inelastic analysis. B33 element is an
Euler-Bernoulli beam ignoring shear deformation. B33 Fig. 3. Load–displacement curves of the example bridge.
 Nonlinear analysis of steel cable-stayed bridges
Fig. 4. Change of the value of
Eeq
. Fig. 5. Change of the cable tensions.
E
the load ratio of 2.23 in the proposed analysis while it fails
at the load ratio of 2.30 in the analysis by the ABAQUS.
The difference between them is within 3.04%. In the
proposed analysis, the cable sag (cable No. 5 & 16) dis-
appears at the load ratio of 0.41. The first partial and
the first full plastic-hinges are formed, respectively, at
the load ratio of 0.93 and at the load ratio of 2.09 at the
middle point of the central span (e.g. at nodes 20 & 59).
As shown in Figure 3, the proposed analysis and the
analysis by the ABAQUS produce the displacements of
2.000 m and 2.120 m at the middle point of the central
span, respectively, at the overall collapse of the example
bridge. The difference between them is within 5.66%.
The analyses produce the displacements of 0.491 m and
0.510 m, respectively, at the top of the left pylon (e.g.
at the nodes 85 & 92) while they produce the ones of
0.599 m and 0.646 m, respectively, at the top of the right
pylon (e.g. at the nodes 99 & 106). Thus, the difference
between them observed at the top of the right pylon is
within 7.28%.
The identical values for the change of the cable sag in
the proposed analysis and the analysis by the ABAQUS
are shown in Figure 4. Also, Figure 5 shows that the
cable tensions are well identified in these analyses. The
nondimensional parameter (Eeq /E) for each cable stay
exceeds 0.70 at the initial iterative step in the nonlinear
inelastic analysis. This means that the cable sag effect
has a slight influence on the ultimate behavior of the
example bridge due to the disappearance of a great part
of the cable sag at the initial iterative step in the nonlinear
inelastic analysis.
7 A PARAMETRIC STUDY AND ULTIMATE
BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS
The parametric study is intended to investigate the effect
of the girder stiffness (EIy )G , the pylon stiffness (EIy )P
363
and the cable stiffness (Ec · Ac ) on the girder behavior
of the example bridges. Table 1 shows the data concern-
ing the stiffness of the main members for the parametric
study. The stiffness of the girder and the pylons are cal-
culated as the H G is in the range of 1.0 − 3.0 m and the
H P in the range of 2.0 − 4.0 m, respectively. Also, the
cable stiffness is calculated as the CD is in the range of
0.06 − 0.1 m.
In Figure 6, the effect of the stiffness of the main mem-
bers on the nondimensional parameter (My /Myp )G for
the girder is shown. The curves in Figure 4 imply that the
margin of the resistance capacity (MRC) for the bend-
ing moments in the girder increases as the stiffness of
the main members increases. The important thing to re-
member is that an increase in the pylon stiffness con-
siderably increases the MRC for the bending moments
in the girder due to a decrease in the girder deflection,
as shown in Figure 7, while an increase in the stiffness
of the girder or the cable stays leads to an increase in
the applied dead load to the girder so that it does not
remarkably increase the MRC for the bending moments
in the girder. As expected, Figure 7 shows that the result
is a reduction in the girder deflection with an increase
in the stiffness of the main members. As illustrated in
Table 1
Stiffness record of the main members
Case (EI y )G (N · m2 ) (EI y )P (N · m2 ) Ec · Ac (N)
(a) 5.93 × 109 to 31.51 × 109 0.61 × 109
87.15 × 109
(b) 31.51 × 109 31.51 × 109 to 0.61 × 109
181.07 × 109
(c) 31.51 × 109 31.51 × 109 0.45 × 109 to
1.25 × 109
364 Song, Kim & Ma

Fig. 6. Effect of (a) the girder stiffness; (b) the pylon stiffness; (c) the cable stiffness on the (My /Myp )G at the middle point of the
central span.

Fig. 7. Effect of (a) the girder stiffness; (b) the pylon stiffness; (c) the cable stiffness on the displacement at the middle point of
the central span.

Fig. 8. Effect of (a) the girder stiffness; (b) the pylon stiffness; (c) the cable stiffness on the (P/Py )G at the girder-pylon
intersection in the girder.

Figure 8, the nondimensional parameters (P/Py )G in the
girder decrease with an increase in the stiffness of the
girder or the pylons. Only the cable stays carry the girder
so that an increase in the stiffness of the cable stays, as
compared to the other members, is more sensitive to
the change in the ultimate load-carrying capacity of the
example bridges (see Figure 9). And even if the MRC
for the axial forces in the girder decreases with an in-
crease in the cable stiffness (see Figure 8c), it is required
to guarantee the sufficient cable redundant for the safety
of the example bridges (see Figure 9c) because the domi-
nant factor in the overall collapse of the example bridges
 Nonlinear analysis of steel cable-stayed bridges 365

Fig. 9. Effect of (a) the girder stiffness; (b) the pylon stiffness; (c) the cable stiffness on the ultimate load-carrying capacity at the
middle point of the central span.

Fig. 10. Effect of (a) the girder stiffness; (b) the pylon stiffness; (c) the cable stiffness on the plastification level at the middle
point of the central span.

is the plastification (see Figure 10) by the bending mo-

ments (see Figure 6) in the girder, not the girder buckling
by the axial forces (see Figure 8). The tendency of the
curves plotted under the ultimate load in Figures 6–10
may be different from that of the other curves because
the load ratios are different at the overall collapse of
the example bridges. It may be emphasized, as shown in
Figure 11, that the local failure in the girder by the plas-
tification is closely related to the cable stiffness in the
example bridges with the floating system. The failure
of a number of cable stays mainly accelerates the local
failure by the plastification in the girder. And then the
local failure induces the overall collapse of the example
bridges.

8 CONCLUSIONS

The work is focused on the parametric study on the arti-

ficial cable-stayed bridges under the symmetric full lane
load and their ultimate behavior analysis. The following Fig. 11. Change in the plastification level at the middle point
are the findings and conclusions. of the central span.
366 Song, Kim & Ma
(1) The work supports that the proposed model can
account for key factors influencing the behavior
of steel cable-stayed bridges such as the follow-
ing: sag effect for cable members; the axial force-
bending moment interaction for girder and pylons;
the large displacement; the material nonlinear be-
havior of each structural component (including the
gradual yielding and the plastification).
(2) Identical solutions between the nonlinear inelas-
tic analysis results by the softening plastic-hinge
model and the ABAQUS are found. This compar-
ative analysis commends that the proposed model
is adequate in assessing the ultimate load-carrying
capacity of cable-stayed bridges.
(3) Even if the tension stiffness change in the cable
stays, which undergo the hardening behavior due
to the axial forces, increases the overall structural
stiffness, the load-displacement curves are almost
straight lines before the overall collapse of the ex-
ample bridge. It implies that not many geometrical
nonlinear effects including the cable sag are in ex-
istence in the early behavior of the example bridge
because the tension stiffness in cable stays is rela-
tively small compared to the stiffness level of the
other steel members.
(4) If an increase in the stiffness of the girder or the
pylons results from an increase in their self-weight,
it is more effective to increase the pylon stiff-
ness than the girder stiffness to increase the MRC
for the bending moments in the girder. The ulti-
mate factor in the overall collapse of the exam-
ple bridges is the local failure by the bending mo-
ments at the middle point of the central span, not
the girder buckling. The cable stiffness has a large
influence on the local failure in the girder of the
example bridges with the floating system. Thus, it
is required to guarantee the sufficient cable redun-
dant for safety of the example bridges if the girders
do not buckle.
REFERENCES
AASHTO (1998), AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifica-
tion, AASHTO.
ABAQUS/Standard User’s Manual Version 6.3, Theory Man-
ual (2001), Hibbitt, Karlsson and Sorensen, Pawtucket, RI.
Adeli, H. & Zhang, J. (1995), Fully nonlinear analysis of com-
posite girder cable-stayed bridges, Computer and Structures,
54(2), 267–77.
American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC). (2001), Load
and Resistance Factor Design Specification, 3rd edn., AISC,
Chicago.
Boonyapinyo, V., Yamada, H. & Miyata, T. (1994), Nonlinear
structural instability of long-span cable-stayed bridges under
gravity and wind loads, Journal of Structural Engineering,
40A, 295–308.
Chen, W. F. & Lui, E. M. (1992), Stability Design of Steel
Frames, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 380.
El-Zanaty, M. H. & Murray, D. W. (1983), Nonlinear finite
element analysis of steel frames, Journal of Structural Engi-
neering, ASCE, 109(2), 353–68.
Ernst, H. J. (1965), Der E-Modul von Seilen unter Berueck-
sichtigung des Durchhanges, Der Bauingenieur, 40, 52–55.
Fleming, J. F. (1979), Nonlinear static analysis of cable-stayed
bridge structures, Computer and Structures, 10(4), 621–35.
Gimsing, N. J. (1983), Cable Supported Bridges: Concepts and
Design, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
Kanok-Nukulchai, W. & Guan, H. (1993), Nonlinear model-
ing of cable-stayed bridges, Journal of Structural and Steel
Research, 26, 249–66.
Kim, S. E. & Chen, W. F. (1996a), Practical advanced analysis
for braced steel frame design, Journal of Structural Engi-
neering, ASCE, 122(11), 1266–74.
Kim, S. E. & Chen, W. F. (1996b), Practical advanced anal-
ysis for unbraced steel frame design, Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, 122(11), 1259–65.
Krishna, P., Arya, S. & Agrawal, T. P. (1985), Effect of cable
stiffness on cable-stayed bridges, Journal of Structural En-
gineering, ASCE, 111(9), 2008–20.
Liew, J. Y. & Tang, L. K. (1998), Nonlinear Refined Plastic
Hinge Analysis of Space Frame Structures, Research Report
No. CE027/98, Department of Civil Engineering, National
University of Singapore, Singapore.
Nakai, H., Kitada, T., Ohminami, R. & Nishimura, T. (1985),
Elasto-plastic and finite displacement analysis of cable-
stayed bridges, Memoires of the Faculty of Engineering,
Osaka University, 26, 251–71.
Nazmy, A. S. & Abdel-Ghaffar, A. M. (1990), Three-
dimensional nonlinear static analysis of cable-stayed
bridges, Computer and Structures, 34(2), 257–71.
Orbison, J. G. (1982), Nonlinear Static Analysis of Three-
Dimensional Steel Frames, Report No. 82-6, Department
of Structural Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, New
York.
Prakash, V. & Powell, G. H. (1993), DRAIN-3DX: Base pro-
gram user guide, version 1.10, a Computer Program dis-
tributed by NISEE/Computer Applications, Department of
Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley.
Ren, W. X. (1999), Ultimate behavior of long-span cable-stayed
bridges, Journal of Bridge Engineering, 4(1), 30–37.
Seif, S. P. & Dilger, W. H. (1990), Nonlinear analysis and col-
lapse load of P/C cable-stayed bridges, Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, 116(3), 829–49.