Cable Stayed Bridges

Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Bridge
A bridge is a structure built to span physical obstacles without closing the way underneath such
as a body of water, valley, or road, for the purpose of providing passage over the obstacle. There
are many different designs that each serve a particular purpose and apply to different situations.
Designs of bridges vary depending on the function of the bridge, the nature of the terrain where
the bridge is constructed and anchored, the material used to make it, and the funds available to
build it.

1.2 Types of bridges

1.2.1. Structure type

a. Beam bridge
Beam bridges are horizontal beams supported at each end by substructure units and can be either
simply supported when the beams only connect across a single span, or continuous when the
beams are connected across two or more spans. When there are multiple spans, the intermediate
supports are known as piers. The vertical force on the bridge becomes a shear and flexural load
on the beam which is transferred down its length to the substructures on either side They are
typically made of steel, concrete or wood. Beam bridge spans rarely exceed 250 feet (76 m) long,
as the flexural stresses increase proportional to the square of the length (and deflection increases
proportional to the 4th power of the length).

b. Truss bridge
A truss bridge is a bridge whose load-bearing superstructure is composed of a truss. This truss is
a structure of connected elements forming triangular units. The connected elements (typically
straight) may be stressed from tension, compression, or sometimes both in response to dynamic
loads.

Page 1
 Cable Stayed Bridges

c. Cantilever bridge
Cantilever bridges are built using cantilevers—horizontal beams supported on only one end.
Most cantilever bridges use a pair of continuous spans that extend from opposite sides of the
supporting piers to meet at the center of the obstacle the bridge crosses. Cantilever bridges are
constructed using much the same materials & techniques as beam bridges. The difference
comes in the action of the forces through the bridge.

d. Arch bridge
Arch bridges have abutments at each end. The weight of the bridge is thrust into the abutments at
either side.

e. Tied arch bridge

Tied arch bridges have an arch-shaped superstructure, but differ from conventional arch bridges.
Instead of transferring the weight of the bridge and traffic loads into thrust forces into the
abutments, the ends of the arches are restrained by tension in the bottom chord of the structure.
They are also called bowstring arches.

f. Suspension bridge
Suspension bridges are suspended from cables. The earliest suspension bridges were made of
ropes or vines covered with pieces of bamboo. In modern bridges, the cables hang from towers
that are attached to caissons or cofferdams. The caissons or cofferdams are implanted deep into
the bed of the lake, river or sea. Sub-types include the simple suspension bridge, the stressed
ribbon bridge, the under spanned suspension bridge, the suspended-deck suspension bridge, and
the self-anchored suspension bridge. There is also what is sometimes called a "semi-suspension"
bridge, of which the Ferry Bridge in Burton-upon-Trent is the only one of its kind in Europe.

g. Cable-stayed bridge
Cable-stayed bridges, like suspension bridges, are held up by cables. However, in a cable-stayed
bridge, less cable is required and the towers holding the cables are proportionately higher

Page 2
 Cable Stayed Bridges

a. Beam bridge b. Truss bridge c. Cantilever bridge

d. Arch bridge e. Tied Arch bridge f. Suspension bridge

g. Cable Stayed bridge

Figure 1.1 Types of bridges
1.2.2 Fixed or movable bridges
Most bridges are fixed bridges, meaning they have no moving parts and stay in one place until
they fail or are demolished. Temporary bridges, such as Bailey bridges, are designed to be
assembled, and taken apart, transported to a different site, and re-used. They are important in
military engineering, and are also used to carry traffic while an old bridge is being rebuilt.
Movable bridges are designed to move out of the way of boats or other kinds of traffic, which
would otherwise be too tall to fit. These are generally electrically powered.

1.2.3 Double-decked bridges

Double-decked (or double-decker) bridges have two levels, such as the George Washington
Bridge, connecting New York City to Bergen County, New Jersey, USA, as the world's busiest
bridge, carrying 102 million vehicles annually;[25][26] truss work between the roadway levels

Page 3
 Cable Stayed Bridges

provided stiffness to the roadways and reduced movement of the upper level when the lower
level was installed three decades after the upper level. The Tsing Ma Bridge and Kap Shui Mun
Bridge in Hong Kong have six lanes on their upper decks, and on their lower decks there are two
lanes and a pair of tracks for MTR metro trains. Some double-decked bridges only use one level
for street traffic.

Figure1.2. The double-decked George Washington Bridge

The Washington Avenue Bridge in Minneapolis reserves its lower level for automobile and light
rail traffic and its upper level for pedestrian and bicycle traffic (predominantly students at the
University of Minnesota). Likewise, in Toronto, the Prince Edward Viaduct has five lanes of
motor traffic, bicycle lanes, and sidewalks on its upper deck; and a pair of tracks for the Bloor–
Danforth subway line on its lower deck. The western span of the San Francisco–Oakland Bay
Bridge also has two levels.

1.2.4 Three-way bridge

A three-way bridge has three separate spans which meet near the center of the bridge. The bridge
appears as a "T" or "Y" when viewed from above. Three-way bridges are extremely rare.

1.2.5 Bridge types by material

Bridge Type Materials Used

Cantilever For small footbridges, the cantilevers may be simple beams; however, large
cantilever bridges designed to handle road or rail traffic use trusses built
from structural steel, or box girders built from prestressed concrete.

Page 4
 Cable Stayed Bridges

Suspension The cables are usually made of steel cables galvanised with zinc, along with
most of the bridge, but some bridges are still made with steel reinforced
concrete.
Arch Stone, brick and other such materials that are strong in compression and
somewhat so in shear.
Beam Beam bridges can use pre-stressed concrete, an inexpensive building
material, which is then embedded with rebar. The resulting bridge can resist
both compression and tension forces.
Truss The triangular pieces of Truss bridges are manufactured from straight and
steel bars, according to the truss bridge designs.

1.3 CABLE STAYED BRIDGE

A cable-stayed bridge has one or more towers (or pylons), from which cables support the bridge
deck. A distinctive feature are the cables which run directly from the tower to the deck, normally
forming a fan-like pattern or a series of parallel lines. This is in contrast to the modern
suspension bridge, where the cables supporting the deck are suspended vertically from the main
cable, anchored at both ends of the bridge and running between the towers. The cable-stayed
bridge is optimal for spans longer than cantilever bridges and shorter than suspension bridges.
This is the range where cantilever bridges would rapidly grow heavier if the span were
lengthened, while suspension bridge cabling would not be more economical if the span were
shortened.
Cable-stayed bridges have been known since the 16th century and used widely since the 19th.
Early examples often combined features from both the cable-stayed and suspension designs,
including the famous Brooklyn Bridge. The design fell from favor through the 20th century as
larger gaps were bridged using pure suspension designs, and shorter ones using various systems
built of reinforced concrete. It once again rose to prominence in the later 20th century when the
combination of new materials, larger construction machinery, and the need to replace older
bridges all lowered the relative price of these designs.

Page 5
 Cable Stayed Bridges

1.3.1 Comparison with suspension bridge

Cable-stayed bridges may appear to be similar to suspension bridges, but in fact, they are quite
different in principle and in their construction.
In suspension bridges, large main cables (normally two) hang between the towers and are
anchored at each end to the ground. This can be difficult to implement when ground conditions
are poor. The main cables, which are free to move on bearings in the towers, bear the load of the
bridge deck. Before the deck is installed, the cables are under tension from their own weight.
Along the main cables smaller cables or rods connect to the bridge deck, which is lifted in
sections. As this is done, the tension in the cables increases, as it does with the live load of traffic
crossing the bridge. The tension on the main cables is transferred to the ground at the anchorages
and by downwards tug on the towers.

Suspension bridge Cable-stayed bridge, fan design

Figure 1.3 Comparision of bridges
In the cable-stayed bridge, the towers are the primary load-bearing structures which transmit the
bridge loads to the ground. A cantilever approach is often used to support the bridge deck near
the towers, but lengths further from them are supported by cables running directly to the towers.
This has the disadvantage, compared to the suspension bridge, that the cables pull to the sides as
opposed to directly up, requiring the bridge deck to be stronger to resist the resulting horizontal
compression loads; but has the advantage of not requiring firm anchorages to resist the horizontal
pull of the main cables of the suspension bridge. By design all static horizontal forces of the
cable-stayed bridge are balanced so that the supporting towers do not tend to tilt or slide, needing
only to resist horizontal forces from the live loads.

Key advantages of the cable-stayed form are as follows:

1) Much greater stiffness than the suspension bridge, so that deformations of the deck under live
loads are reduced.
2) Can be constructed by cantilevering out from the tower – the cables act both as temporary and
permanent supports to the bridge deck.

Page 6
 Cable Stayed Bridges

3) For a symmetrical bridge (i.e. spans on either side of the tower are the same), the horizontal
forces balance and large ground anchorages are not required.

1.3.2 Designs
There are four major classes of rigging on cable-stayed bridges: mono, harp, fan, and star.
1) The mono design uses a single cable from its towers and is one of the lesser-used examples of
the class.
2) In the harp or parallel design, the cables are nearly parallel so that the height of their
attachment to the tower is proportional to the distance from the tower to their mounting on the
deck.
3) In the fan design, the cables all connect to or pass over the top of the towers. The fan design is
structurally superior with a minimum moment applied to the towers but for practical reasons, the
modified fan is preferred especially where many cables are necessary. In the modified fan
arrangement the cables terminate near to the top of the tower but are spaced from each other
sufficiently to allow better termination, improved environmental protection, and good access to
individual cables for maintenance.
4) In the star design, another relatively rare design, the cables are spaced apart on the tower, like
the harp design, but connect to one point or a number of closely spaced points on the deck.

1) Mono design 2) Harp design

3) Fan design 3) Star design

Figure 1.4 Different types of cable profile
There are also four arrangements for support columns: single, double, portal and A-shaped.
1) The single arrangement uses a single column for cable support, normally projecting through
the center of the deck, but in some cases located on one side or the other.
2) The double arrangement places pairs of columns on both sides of the deck.

Page 7
 Cable Stayed Bridges

3) The portal is similar to the double arrangement but has a third member connecting the tops of
the two columns to form a door-like shape or portal. This offers additional strength, especially
against traverse loads.
4) The A-shaped design is similar in concept to the portal but achieves the same goal by angling
the two columns towards each other to meet at the top, eliminating the need for the third
member. The inverted Y design combines the A-shaped on the bottom with the single on top.

1.3.3 Variations

1) Side-spar cable-stayed bridge

A side-spar cable-stayed bridge uses a central tower supported on only one side. This design
allows the construction of a curved bridge.

2) Cantilever spar cable-stayed bridge

Far more radical in its structure, the Puente del Alamillo (1992) uses a single cantilever spar on
one side of the span, with cables on one side only to support the bridge deck. Unlike other cable-
stayed types, this bridge exerts considerable overturning force upon its foundation and the spar
must resist the bending caused by the cables, as the cable forces are not balanced by opposing
cables. The spar of this particular bridge forms the gnomon of a large garden sundial.

3) Multiple-span cable-stayed bridge

Cable-stayed bridges with more than three spans involve significantly more challenging designs
than do 2-span or 3-span structures.
In a 2-span or 3-span cable-stayed bridge, the loads from the main spans are normally anchored
back near the end abutments by stays in the end spans. For more spans, this is not the case and
the bridge structure is less stiff overall. This can create difficulties in both the design of the deck
and the pylons. Example of multiple-span structures in which this is the case include Ting Kau
Bridge, where additional 'cross-bracing' stays are used to stabilise the pylons.

Page 8
 Cable Stayed Bridges

4) Extradosed bridge
The extradosed bridge is a cable-stayed bridge but with a more substantial bridge deck that,
being stiffer and stronger, allows the cables to be omitted close to the tower and for the towers to
be lower in proportion to the span. The first extradosed bridges were the Ganter Bridge and
Sunniberg Bridge in Switzerland.

1) Side spar cable stayed bridge 2) Cantilever spar cable-stayed bridge

3) Multiple span cable stayed bridge 4) Extradosed Bridge

Figure 1.5 Cable Stayed Bridges

Page 9
 Cable Stayed Bridges

Chapter 2
Literature review

2.1 History
Cable-stayed bridges date back to 1595, where designs were found in Machinae Novae, a book
by Venetian inventor Fausto Veranzio. Many early suspension bridges were cable-stayed
construction, including the 1817 footbridge Dryburgh Abbey Bridge, James Dredge's
patented Victoria Bridge, Bath (1836), and the later Albert Bridge (1872) and Brooklyn
Bridge (1883). Their designers found that the combination of technologies created a stiffer
bridge. John A. Roebling took particular advantage of this to limit deformations due to railway
loads in the Niagara Falls Suspension Bridge.

The earliest known surviving example of a true cable-stayed bridge in the United States is E.E.
Runyon's largely intact steel or iron Bluff Dale Suspension bridge with wooden stringers and
decking in Bluff Dale, Texas (1890), or his weeks earlier but ruined Barton Creek
Bridge between Huckabay, Texas and Gordon, Texas (1889 or 1890).[1][2] In the twentieth
century, early examples of cable-stayed bridges included A. Gisclard's unusual Cassagnes bridge
(1899),[3] in which the horizontal part of the cable forces is balanced by a separate horizontal tie
cable, preventing significant compression in the deck, and G. Leinekugel le Coq's
bridge[4] at Lézardrieux in Brittany (1924). Eduardo Torroja designed a cable-stayed
aqueduct[5] at Tempul in 1926.[6] Albert Caquot's 1952 concrete-decked cable-stayed
bridge[7]over the Donzère-Mondragon canal at Pierrelatte is one of the first of the modern type,
but had little influence on later development.[6] The steel-decked Strömsund Bridge designed
by Franz Dischinger (1955) is, therefore, more often cited as the first modern cable-stayed
bridge.

Other key pioneers included Fabrizio de Miranda, Riccardo Morandi, and Fritz Leonhardt. Early
bridges from this period used very few stay cables, as in the Theodor Heuss Bridge (1958).

Page 10
 Cable Stayed Bridges

However, this involves substantial erection costs, and more modern structures tend to use many
more cables to ensure greater economy.

2.2 Various past studies regarding Cable stayed bridges

• Elizabeth Davalos paper on “Structural Behaviour of Cable-stayed Bridges” in which

her objective of this was to describe in detail the basic structural behaviour of each of the
components of cable-stayed bridges, cable-stayed bridges have emerged as the dominant
structural system for long span bridge crossings during the past thirty years. That success is
due to a combination of technical advancements and pleasing aesthetics attributes. The
interaction of the various structural components results in an efficient structure which is
continuously evolving and providing new methods to increase span lengths and to present the
analysis of a specific cable-stayed bridge which was proposed for the Charles River
Crossing.

• Haijun Wang, Jiandong Wang and Hua Wei’s “Case Study on 4000 m-span Cable-
stayed Suspension Bridge” This study describes the case studies for a cable-stayed
suspension bridges proposed over the Tsugaru Strait, Japan. Center Bridge is designed as a
compound bridge of suspension bridges and cable-stayed bridges with 4000 m super-long-
span. Case studies about the effects of cable-stayed bridge length, the design of sub-cable,
height and stiffness of main tower, type of foundation and length of side span on
displacement were carried out. With appropriate design of above parameters, the
compound bridge can reduce horizontal displacement of main tower and vertical deflection
in the central portion and enhance resistance to partial loading. The study reports the
results based on these case studies.

• J L Saxton “Report On The Millau Viaduct” This paper provides a critical analysis of the
world’s highest road bridge and longest multi –span cable stayed, the Millau Viaduct. Areas
covered include aesthetics, loadings, design and construction.

Page 11
 Cable Stayed Bridges

Chapter 3
Brief Description of Cable Stayed Bridges

Cable stayed bridges are indeterminate structures. The superstructure behaves as a continuous
beam elastically supported by the cables, which are connected to one or two towers. The
structural system consists of three main structural sub-systems: Stiffening girder, tower, and
inclined cables. The interrelation of these components makes the structural behaviour of
cablestayed bridges efficient for long-span structures, in addition to providing an aesthetic
pleasant solution.
The cable-stayed system has become a very effective and economical system during the last
century. It is mainly used to cover large spans. The development of this structural system is due
to advances in materials, engineering analysis and design, and construction methodology. The
structural components of a cable-stayed system behave in the following manner: The stiffening
girder transmits the load to the tower through the cables, which are always in tension. The
stiffening girder is subjected to bending and axial loading. The tower transmits the load to the
foundation under mainly axial action. The design of cable-stayed bridges, in comparison with the
normal bridges, is controlled by the construction sequence, and the construction loads tend to be
the dominant design loading.
3.1 Cable types
Different types of cables are used in cable-stayed bridges; their form and configuration depend
on the way individual wires are assembled. The steel used for the cables is stronger than ordinary
steel. A strand is generally composed of seven wires, helically formed around a center wire; the
wire diameter is between 3 and 7 mm. The strands are closely packed together and typically
bounded with an helical strand.
Cables are the most important elements in cable-stayed bridges; they carry the load from the
superstructure to the tower and to the backstay cable anchorages. In addition to high tensile
strength, they must also have high fatigue resistance and corrosion protection.

Page 12
 Cable Stayed Bridges

Cables are classified according to the following descriptions

• Helically-wound galvanized strands.
Ultimate Tensile o-u =670 MPa
Stress Young Modulus E = 165 000 MPa
• Parallel wire strands.
Ultimate Tensile o- =1860 MPa
Stress Young Modulus E = 190 000 MPa
• Strands of parallel wire cables.
Ultimate Tensile Stress o- =1 600 Mpa
Young Modulus E = 200 000 MPa
• Locked coil strands.
Ultimate Tensile Stress o- =1500 MPa
Young Modulus E = 170 000 MPa
The Allowable Stress under dead load effect for the cables under dead load is :
Ud = 0.40 * o-
Each cable type has advantages and disadvantages. For example, locked coil strands
have variable stress-strain behaviour and low fatigue strength at the sockets. Therefore,
they are less frequently used. It is better to choose a type of cable where the modulus of
elasticity is high and constant. The parallel wire strand is the most commonly cable type.

3.2 Cable arrangements

Cable-stayed systems are classified according to the different longitudinal and transverse cable
arrangements. Cable layout is fundamental issue that concerns cables stayed bridges. It not only
affects the structural performance of the bridge, but also the method of erection and the
economics.

3.2.1 Longitudinal Arrangement

The arrangement of the cables involves a number of considerations. It depends on the bridge
requirements, site conditions and aesthetics appearance. The longitudinal arrangements are
classified as follows:

Page 13
 Cable Stayed Bridges

• Harp or parallel system: The cables are parallel to each other and are connected to the tower
at different heights. The aesthetics of this kind of configuration are very pleasant. However,
the compression in the girder is higher than the others patterns, and the tower is subjected to
bending moments (Figure 3.1) .

Figure 3.1: Harp System

• Fan System: This is a modification of the harp system; the cables are connected at the same
distance from the top of the tower. The fan system is attractive for a bridge where the
longitudinal layout is a single-plane, because the cable slope is steeper, it needs and
consequently the axial force in the girder is smaller(figure 3.2)

Figure 3.2:Fan System

• Radial System: With the radial configuration, all the cables connect to the top of the tower.
This is a convenient cable configuration because all the cables have their maximum
inclination; therefore the amount of material required in the girder is reduced. However, this
configuration may cause congestion problems and the detailing may be complex (figure 3.3).

Page 14
 Cable Stayed Bridges

Figure 3.3: Radial System

3.2.2 Transverse Arrangement

For the transverse arrangement the classification is made according to the positioning of the
cables in different planes. Two basic classifications follow:

• Single-plane system: This system is composed of a single cable layout along the longitudinal
axis of the superstructure. This kind of layout is governed by torsional 17 behaviour. The
forces are created by unsymmetrical loading on the deck. The main girder must have
adequate torsional stiffness to resist the torsion force.
• Two-plane system: If the tower is of the shape of an H-Tower, the layout is a two-plane
vertical system. If only one tower is provided in the middle of the superstructure, then the
layout is a two-plane, inclined system. The transverse layout has two options for the
anchorage. The anchorage is located either outside of the deck structure or inside the main
girder. The spacing of the cables varies according the chosen layout and the aesthetics
requirements. The current trend is to employ many cables. Increasing the number of cables
reduces the required stiffness of the girders, and results in more slender superstructure
sections. Consequently, the load in each cable decreases, and the construction process is
simplified.

3.3 Deck Types

The most common deck type for these bridges is the orthotropic deck, which consists of
longitudinal ribs resting on cross-girders. Orhtotropic decks are a very light, efficient,

Page 15
 Cable Stayed Bridges

superstructure solution for long span bridges. Concrete deck systems, steel deck systems and
composite deck systems are also widely used in cable-stayed systems. Steel decks are about
twenty percent lighter than concrete decks. Concrete decks are more common in multiple stay
bridges. The choice of the material is in function of the required stiffness, the method of erection,
and the economics.
Deck systems are chosen according to the cable layout, the span dimensions, the material
utilized, and the special requirements of the bridge. The most common types of deck are shown
in figure 3.4. The qualities required for the deck also depend on the nature of the structure and its
service requirements (road or rail bridge). Of the deck types shown in figure 3.4, the most
frequently used deck system is the box section deck because it provides convenient anchorages,
and has significant torsional properties. It is common to utilize diagonal bracing and frame-type
diaphragms to increase the rigidity of the box section. When selecting a deck, it is also important
to consider maintenance and deflections limits.

Page 16
 Cable Stayed Bridges

Figure 3.4: Deck Types

3.4 Tower types

The tower shape is mainly selected for aesthetic reasons, and is refined based on proportions,
materials, and restrictions associated with the tower design. A considerable variety of tower
shapes exist. In general, the shape of the tower is governed by the required height and the
environmental loading conditions, such as seismic zones and wind criteria. The towers are
classified according to the basic forms shown in figure 3.5. The towers are subjected to axial

Page 17
 Cable Stayed Bridges

forces. Thus they must provide resistance to buckling. A more sophisticated analysis of the tower
includes the non-linear P-Delta effect. In addition, the tower strength also has to be checked
under lateral loads and second-order effects (non-linearity) produced by tension in the cables.
Box-sections are most frequently used for the towers. They can be fabricated out of steel or
reinforced or prestressed concrete. Concrete towers are more common than steel towers because
they allow more freedom of shaping, and are more economical.

Figure 3.5: Tower Types

Page 18
 Cable Stayed Bridges

Chapter 4
Case study
4.1 General Introduction
The Millau Bridge or Viaduct as it should technically be known as provides the final missing
link in the A75 autoroute ultimately connecting Paris to Barcelona. Prior the viaducts
construction traffic would have had to descend the Tarn Valley causing a bottle neck in the town
of Millau especially during the summer months of July and August. The multi-span cable stayed
bridge passes over the Tarn valley at its lowest point between two plateaus. In order to do this it
had to become the tallest road bridge in the world creating the world’s tallest bridge piers
standing at 242m, the structure rising to 343m at the top of the pylon. The bridge also holds the
title of the world’s longest multi-span cable stayed bridge with a total length of 2460m. There is
a slight gradient of 3% from North to South as well as a slight curve about a radius of 20,000m.
The piers are of post tensioned reinforced concrete and the deck and pylons are of steel.
Several initial proposals were at first considered by SETRA (the French Highway Department)
in linking the existing autoroutes to the north and south of the Tarn Valley. These included the
idea proposed by initially by bridge designer Michel Virlogeux. This included a route that would
partially descend the valley, cross the Tarn with a 700m span cable stayed bridge and then tunnel
through the steeper North side of valley until and joining up with the autoroute. However this
proposal was to prove too expensive and too damaging on the local environment. In 1990 the
decision was made to pass the valley at the bridges current location with a 2500m bridge. Michel
Virlogeux proposed a design very similar to the final structure consisting of seven main piers
with approach piers and a slightly different cable arrangement. A change in director at SETRA
saw a controlled design competition take place in 1993 to ensure that the best solution was
found. The only design similar to Virlogeux’s was forwarded by Foster and Partners. However it
was announced that SETRA design offices would no longer continue an active role in the design
so Virlogeux left the department and teamed up with Lord Foster. In 1995 the second design
phase took place in which it was decided that the design proposed by Foster and Virlogeux
would be used.

Page 19
 Cable Stayed Bridges

The decision to construct the bridge under concession agreement was made in 1998 and the
competition for construction tender took place in 2000. It was announced in March 2001 that
Eiffage would be concessionaire under a new subsidiary company created for the construction -
Compagnie Eiffage du Millau Viaduct. The company holds a 75 year operating concession with
income from the tolls paying for the construction. The bridge was inaugurated on 14th December
2004 and opened to traffic two days later.

Figure 4.1 Millau Bridge

4.2 Structural Assessment

The bridge takes the form of a multi-span cable stayed bridge. Having multiple spans there are
no back stays as with most cables stayed bridges to anchor the pylons to a rigid support. Instead
adverse loads on one span directly interact with the next as the pylons bend to accommodate this.
Due to the height of bridge it is important that the pylons have a relatively low bending stiffness
compared to the piers. If this is not the case and large bending moments may be transferred to the
pier, huge bending moments would result at the base of the piers. Considering the poor bedrock
of limestone containing significant cavities the piers are founded on, this would potentially cause
problems. The shapes of the pylons seem to be significant in reducing the bending moment
transferred to the piers.
The longitudinal A frame appears to encourage the resolution of moments into vertical forces.
With the cables inducing a bending moment in the pylon, one ‘leg’ of the pylon will go into
tension and the other compression. These forces can be transferred to the ground by the split
piers. The steel deck is placed into compression by the cable stays. The expectancy here would
be to use a prestressed concrete deck due to its good compressive strength.

Page 20
 Cable Stayed Bridges

Figure 4.2 Pylons

However the chosen launching method dictated that the deck is of steel. During the launch
effective spans where 171m so the ductility of steel was taken advantage of. A concrete deck
may have been susceptible to cracking under its own weight which may have lead problems
during its serviceability lifetime. Preventing such cracking during the launch would mean pre-
stressing the deck in advance using tendons and also completely erecting the pylons and cables
prior to launch, effectively pre-stressing the deck superstructure. This would prove time
consuming and the steel deck was considered the more efficient option. The steel deck was seen
to undulate during construction but due to its high ductility this did not result in any lasting
structural problems. As a result the deck needs to be able resist any associated buckling with the
anticipated compressive loads which may not have been such an issue as with a concrete deck.
As previously mentioned the single plane of cable stays introduces potential problems associated
with torsion. Adverse live loading on one side of the cables and no live loading on the other side

Page 21
 Cable Stayed Bridges

will result in torsion. Using an A frame or other similar pier design fixed to the deck itself would
provide torsional restraint limiting the torsion effects to in between spans.

Figure 4.3 Bending Moment Diagram

However the pier design used leaves cantilevered edges at the supports. It is therefore necessary
to provide torsional restraint in the deck itself. This is provided in the form of triangulated cross
beams spaced at 4.16m longitudinally supporting the continuous steel box section. Obviously
with cables in two planes supporting the bridge, less consideration would have to be given to the
torsional characteristics of the bridge. However given the location I feel that this would introduce
too much complexity when viewing the bridge from any location other than square on.
When analysed, the deck would have been considered continuous over a series of fixed cable
supports. Although technically not the case as the cables are elastic, this allows for a rough idea
of the tension in each cable to be obtained using the worst load case. When analysed
computationally an iterative process will be used to obtain the optimum values of tensions in the
cables and compression and bending in the deck. All the previously mentioned factors will vary
according with the location of the cable anchors on the deck. This is because the arrangement of
cables is not a harp arrangement i.e. has varying inclinations so varying horizontal and vertical
components. Computational analysis will be required to accurately model this effect. Bending of
the deck between the cables can be roughly calculated using the standard results for a fixed beam
taking into consideration the effect of axial loads induced by the cables. Depending\ on the
location along the deck there will be different amounts of compression resulting from the tension

Page 22
 Cable Stayed Bridges

in the cables. Hogging will act as the reduce compression in the top of the deck and increase
compression towards the base; sagging will obviously be vice-versa. The change in length of the
cables and the pretensioning is important as extension and contraction can affect the moment in
the deck. Without taking extension of the cables into consideration the moment due to uniform
vertical load on the deck will generate equal hogging and sagging moments in the effective spans
between cables. With this considered the so called ‘jelly effect’ will occur. As cables anchored
closer to the main mid-span of the deck are likely to extend more so there will be predominantly
sagging moment. The cables closer to the pylon have a greater vertical component so hogging
will be more apparent here. With a semi fan/harp arrangement you would expect the cables to be
spaced closer at the mid-span. This is where the cables will have a smaller vertical component
due to their inclination. However with Millau this has not been done so these cables are likely to
experience greater tension under live load and cause increased bending to the pylon whilst acting
to hold the bridge up. Again this is an issue to do with aesthetics with the all main spans being
equal; it makes sense to make the cable spacing equal to show good order. The areas of the deck
closest to the pylons will experience the most compression as the cables acting over the rest of
the span will incrementally increase the compression up to this point. There is a ‘window’ in the
cable stays here as the increased compression effectively acts as a pre-stress improving bending
stiffness. As mentioned the bending moments will alter the compression force in the deck.
Ideally the deck will be acting solely in compression with the bending being considered and how
it will affect the compression across the section. A careful balance is required taking into account
the various load conditions ensuring the deck remains predominantly in compression but to avoid
buckling. Having a steel deck means that if adverse loading causes the deck to go into tension at
some point, this is not a problem due to steels ductile properties. Consideration would have been
given to the effects at the abutments. The deck goes from being elastically supported by the
cables to being rigidly supported by a concrete foundation. This potentially can introduce large
hogging moments in the deck. A solution of this would be to gradually decrease the depth of any
approach making it more flexible at the interchange. As mentioned the temperature effects are
going to be very important considering the temperature range and the length of the deck. The
most important temperature effect will be due to temperature difference at different times of day
where bending of the deck will result. The effective temperature is unlikely to pose such a
problem as the structure will expand/contract as one given the thermal coefficient of expansion is

Page 23
 Cable Stayed Bridges

the same for concrete and steel. However with the cables being of different length there size will
vary accordingly with most adverse affects being seen in the longer cables. They will extend/sag
more in extremely hot temperatures and contract more in extremely cold temperatures. As well
as for aesthetic purposes the likely reason the piers are the shape they are is to increase flexibility
longitudinally to handle expansion of the deck due to temperature. As mentioned the temperature
difference is likely to be more of a problem. This effect is likely to be greater in the morning due
to the surface finish of the deck. With the road surface being black asphalt and the underside
having a white finish the effect of the sun heating the deck may be exaggerated. This will cause a
sagging moment as greater compression will be induced on the upper surface of the deck as it
tries to extend more. The design of the bearing above the piers is very important here. The deck
must be allowed to expand as necessary and excessive restraint at the piers can cause increased
compression. A tr nsfer of moment to the pier will occur if the connection is stiff which will then
in turn have to be resisted by the foundations as previously mentioned. The likelihood is that the
bearings allow a limited amount of rotation to prevent this transfer of moment.

Page 24
 Cable Stayed Bridges

Chapter 5
Conclusion
From the previous chapters, it is concluded that the main parameters that governs the behaviour
of a cable-stayed bridge are: -
- The number and configuration of the cables.
- Geometric proportions.
- Support conditions
- Stiffness of the main structural components.
The height of the tower constitutes an important issue because of its relation with the cables and
the girder. The height of the tower determines the inclination of the cables, and the normal force
acting in the girder.
Thus, the height of the tower affects directly the stiffness of the bridge system. From parametric
studies, the optimal behaviour of the cable-stayed bridges is found when the ratio between the
tower height and the dimension of the central span lies between 0.20 and 0.25 . With respect to
the cables, if the cable tends to be more inclined, the stresses in the cable decrease, and the tower
requires a smaller cross-section.
However, if the length of the cables increases, the deformation increases, and the cables require
more material. Considering these two factors, the recommended inclination for the cables ranges
between 25 degrees and 65 degrees. 45 degrees is the optimal inclination. The number of cables
is also an important factor to consider the larger the number of cables the better the behaviour. If
only few cables are provided, the forces in the cables are bigger, the anchorages more difficult,
and the cross-section required for the girder is increased. By providing a large number of cables,
the overall behaviour tends to approximate a continuous elastic support, the anchorage is
simplified, and the cross-section required in the girder decreases.For the support conditions, the
best performance is ach Cable-stayed bridges have emerged as the dominant structural system for
long span bridge crossings during the past thirty years. That success is due to a combination of technical
advancements and pleasing aesthetics attributes. The interaction of the various structural components
results in an efficient structure which is continuously evolving and providing new methods to increase
span lengths. The objective of this thesis is to describe in detail the basic structural behaviour of each of

Page 25
 Cable Stayed Bridges

the components of cable-stayed bridges, and to present the analysis of a specific cable-stayed bridge
which was proposed for the Charles River Crossing.ieved when the girder is considered as a
continuous girder with a movable bearing in the tower connection instead of a rigid connection,
which increases the moment at this joint .

Page 26
 Cable Stayed Bridges

References
1.Elizabeth Davalos paper on “Structural Behaviour of Cable-stayed Bridges” Massacahusetts

institute of technology,may 2000

2. M.S. Troisky. Cable-stayed bridge: Theory and design. BSP Professional Books, London,

1988.

3. Salvatore Di Bernardo. Motion Based Design of Cable-Stayed Bridges. Master of Science

Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. June 1998.

4. F. Leonhardt and W. Zeller, Past, present and future of cable-stayed bridges. In M. Ito,

editor. Cable-Stayed Bridges, Recent Developments and their Future. The Netherlands, 1991.

Page 27