V18i11 57

Journal of Xi’an Shiyou University, Natural Science Edition ISSN:1673-064X
Analysis of suspension bridge with different types of anchoring considering vehicular

loading using SAP2000
MOHD. SHADAB1, Deepak Bandewar2, Rakesh Patel3
P.G. Scholar1, Asst. Prof.2, Assoc. Prof.3

Department of Civil Engineering, Sagar Institute of Research Technology & Science,
Bhopal
ABSTRACT:
Cable-supported bridges are classified into cable-stayed and suspension bridges. Suspension
bridges are one of the main types of long-span bridges and possess significant benefits in terms
of material properties and height-span ratio of the stiffening girders. Suspension bridges are
comprised of main beams, tower piers, cables, and anchorages, with the anchorages playing
the major role in anchoring the suspension bridge’s main cables. Based on the main cable
anchoring method, suspension bridges are classified into self-anchored or earth-anchored.
In a self-anchored bridge type, the main cable is directly attached to the stiffening girder,
whereas in the earth-anchored type, the main cable is directly attached to the bridge via
anchorages at the beginning and end locations.
Anchorages are vital parts of earth-anchored suspension bridges, and support the tension of the
main cables . Anchorages for earth-anchored suspension bridges can be classified into gravity
and tunnel types.
In this study proposing, the pull-out behaviour of a tunnel-type anchorage considering both
geometric and rock joint characteristics.
Keywords: bridge, concrete, anchorage, analysis, force, stress.
INTRODUCTION:
A suspension bridge is referred to a type bridge supported by cables. This type of bridge has
been with mankind since ancient times. Today’s large and magnificent suspension bridges were
made possible through the establishment of structural analysis methods, material
developments, construction methods, and computer technology developments. Suspension
bridges are one of the most beautiful special bridges, and are considered one of the types of
bridges many structural engineers dream to design.
Anchorages are important structures that transmit the horizontal and vertical forces of the main
cable to the foundations. The types of anchorages are classified into gravity-type anchorages,
http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

tunnel-type anchorages, and rock anchorages. Gravity-type anchorage consists of a method of

resisting the loads from the cables with the self-weight of the foundation and anchor frame.
Many suspension bridges use gravity-type anchorages. Tunnel-type anchorage is a method of
resisting the loads of the cables by using the shear forces of the outer circumference of the steel
frame and the pressure of the plug body. Rock anchorage is a method of resisting the loads of
the cable by using the weight, adhesion, and frictional resistance of rock wedges. This method
is used in areas with good rock formations.
Fig 1 Anchorage types
LITERATURE REVIEW:
Xiangong Zhou et.al (2022) the research and analysis method of structural fragility of three-
tower self-anchored suspension bridge was presented in detail based on practical engineering
cases.
Under the action of seismic waves along the bridge, the damage exceedance probability of the
damped connection system is lower than that of the fully floating structure system. At the same
time, the difference in damage exceedance probability of the two systems under the same
damage level continues to expand. It shows that the addition of a damper device can
significantly improve the seismic performance of the structure, and the reduction effect of a
damper device for a high-intensity earthquake is more obvious than that for a low-intensity
earthquake. The probability of slight and moderate damage to the piers and bearings of the
floating system of the threetower self-anchored suspension bridge is high, while the probability
of damage to the bridge tower is relatively small. This design is in line with the design idea of
taking the easily repaired components as secondary components in the seismic design.
Zhijin Shen et.al (2022) research paper conducted a field-scale experiment to study the north
side tunnel of Wujiagang Bridge in Yichang, China. According to the similarity principle, the

1:12 tunnel anchor scale model was established. The tunnel anchor scale model was selected
in the area adjacent to the actual project site to ensure the similarity of stratigraphic conditions.
Through the use of a displacement meter, inclinometer hole, strain gauge, micrometers, and
other comprehensive monitoring methods, the design load test, overload test, overload
rheological test, and ultimate bearing capacity failure test were carried out. Through the
structural deformation observation and stress observation of the anchorage body and
surrounding rock, the stress deformation characteristics and rheological characteristics of the
anchorage body and surrounding rock in the field-scale experiment were analyzed. The
deformation failure mechanism, deformation failure process, potential failure mode, and
overload capacity of solid tunnel anchor were investigated.
Based on the limit equilibrium analysis results of the model, the safety and rationality of the
tunnel anchorage structure design of the actual suspension bridge were evaluated. According
to the model experiment results, under the design load of 1P, the deformation of the rock mass
at the top of the anchor tunnel is the largest, which is 0.005 mm followed by the deformation
of the rock mass at the front anchor surface, and the deformation of the rock mass at the rear
anchor surface is the smallest, which is 0.001 mm. According to the similarity principle, it is
speculated that the maximum deformation of the front anchor surface of the solid anchor is
about 1.2 mm under 1P load. Rheological test results show that the long-term rheological
characteristics of tunnel anchorage are not obvious under the action of design load and step-
by-step overload load, and the anchorage can be in a long-term stable state under rheological
load. The scheme of tunnel anchorage on the north side of Wujiagang Yangtze River Bridge in
Yichang can meet the engineering requirements.
OBJECTIVES OF THE RESEARCH
The primary goals of the current examination are as per the following:-
1 To determine the pull out behaviour of the tunnel type anchorage and gravity type based
on rock joint.
2 To investigation the load bearing capacity of the anchorage bridge with two different
condition.
3 To determine finite element analysis of anchorage based bridge using analysis tool
SAP2000.

4 To determine the most suitable type of anchorage in comparison.
METHODOLOGY:
Steps of the Analysis
Step 1 First step is to study different research papers from authors all across the globe to
understand the research done in the same field and this gave our study base and scope for
further research.
Step 2 this step includes defining the unit to design the model initialization where the units is
measured as Metric SI. Steel code and concrete design code is locked as IS 800:2007 and IS
456:2000.
Fig 2 Initialization of Model
Step 3: Modelling of the section a working drawing

Fig 3 Modeling of Sectional Drawing
Fig 4 Model Structure
Step 4: Defining materials as per Indian Standards and assigning to the structural members

Fig 5 Defining Bridge Section
Step 5: Defining Properties of Material
Fig 6 Defining Properties of Material

Step 6: Assigning tendons to precast segmental beam.

Fig 7 Defining and Assigning Bridge Tendons
Step 7: Assigning Loading conditions to the model Precast Segmental beam with tendons.

Fig 8 Defining Load Pattern
Step 8: Defining Vehicular Loading

Fig 9 Vehicular Loading
Step 9: Defining Seismic loading as per IS 1893:2016 Part I

Fig 10 Defining Seismic Loading
Step 10: Analyzing the stress on the structure

Fig 11 Running Load Cases
Fig 12 Stress Analysis
Flow Chart of the Study

Fig 13 Flow Chart of the Study
Table 1 Geometrical Description
Dimension of the model
Length 17500 mm
Height 3400 mm
Web thickness 300 mm
Construction joint for crash barrier portion 3000 mm
Opening 800 x 900 mm
Anchorage Tunnel and Gravity
Haunch 100 x 100 mm
ANALYSIS RESULT
Shear Force in kN
Table 2 Shear Force in kN
Shear force in kN
Bridge with Tunnel type anchorage 476.098
Bridge with Gravity type anchorage 379.207

Bridge with Gravity type anchorage

Cases
Bridge with Tunnel type anchorage
0 100 200 300 400 500

Shear Force in KN
Discussion: As the above graph stated shear force was least found in bridge with gravity type
anchorage as shear force for bridges with Gravity type anchorage was 379.207 kN whereas
shear force for bridge with Tunnel type anchorage was 476.098 kN.
Maximum Deflection in mm
Table 3 Maximum Deflection in mm
Maximum Deflection in mm

Cases
585 590 595 600 605 610 615 620 625

Deflection in mm

Discussion: The structure was fragmental in segments to evaluate maximum deflection as

minor gap was seen in both the cases as of 9% difference.
Torsional Values in kN-m
Table 4 Torsional Values in kN-m
Torsional Values in KNm

Cases
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16

Torsion
Discussion: Torsion is the state of strain in a material that has been twisted by an applied torque.
Something happens when a structural member is subjected to a twisting force. Torsion is the
state of strain that has deformed the rectangles, and it is made up entirely of pure shear. The
torsion values for bridge with tunnel anchorage was 0.134 kn-m and bridge with gravity
anchorage was 0.063 kN-m.
Support Reaction in kN
Table 5 Support Reaction in kN
Support Reaction in kN
Bridge withTunnel type anchorage 3817.098


Cases
Bridge withTunnel type anchorage
3600 3700 3800 3900 4000 4100 4200

Support reaction in KN
Discussion: A support reaction is a force that is applied to a support or a resultant restraining

end moment that occurs as a result of the inability to move. Support responses in structural
systems are in balance with external forces operating on the structure. Here the support reaction
was maximum with a bridge with gravity anchorage in comparison to a bridge with tunnel
anchorage.
Maximum Moment in kN-m
Table 6 Maximum Moment in kN-m
Maximum Moment in kN-m


Cases
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Moment in KN/m
Discussion: The maximum bending moment in a girder occurs when the shear force at that
section is zero or changes sign because the bending moment is zero at the point of contra
flexure. A sagging bending moment, also known as a positive bending moment, is one such
bending moment. Here the bending moment was 785.007 kN-m for bridge with gravity
anchorage whereas 1011.88 kN-m for bridge with tunnel anchorage.
CONCLUSION
Shear Force in kN
Shear force was least found in bridges with Gravity anchorage as shear force for bridges was
379.207 kN whereas shear force for bridges with tunnel anchorage was 476.098 kN.
Maximum Deflection
The structure was fragmental in segments to evaluate maximum displacement as a minor gap
was seen in both the cases of 9% difference.
Torsional Values
The state of strain in a material that has been twisted by an applied torque is known as torsion.
When a structural element is subjected to a twisting force, something happens. Torsion is the
state of strain that has deformed the rectangles, and it is made up entirely of pure shear. The
torsion values for bridge with tunnel anchorage was 0.134 kn-m and bridge with gravity
anchorage was 0.063 kn-m.
Support Reaction

A support reaction is a force that is applied to a support or a resultant restraining end moment
that occurs as a result of the inability to move. Support responses in structural systems are in
balance with external forces operating on the structure. Here the support reaction was
maximum with a bridge with gravity anchorage in comparison to a bridge with tunnel
anchorage.
Maximum Moment
The maximum bending moment in a girder occurs when the shear force at that section is zero
or changes sign because the bending moment is zero at the point of contra flexure. A sagging
bending moment, also known as a positive bending moment, is one such bending moment.
Here the bending moment was 785.007 kN-m for bridge with gravity anchorage whereas
1011.88 kN-m for bridge with tunnel anchorage.
Summary: As per our comparative results stated above it can be said that Gravity type anchorage is
comparatively more suitable in comparison to tunnel type thus it can be said that gravity type
anchorage can result in more reliable type of anchorages.
REFERENCES
1. Chang-ke Jiao, Xin Dong, Ai-qun Li, Guang-dong Zhou, and Xiao-ping Wu, [Seismic
Response of Long-Span Triple-Tower Suspension Bridge under Random Ground
Motion], Hindawi Mathematical Problems in Engineering Volume 2017, Article ID
3457452, 16 pages.
2. Xiangong Zhou, Lei Cao, Heng Han, Xiaobo Zheng , Hanhao Zhang and Zhiqing
Zhang, [Seismic Fragility Analysis of Self-Anchored Suspension Bridge Considering
Damping Effect], Hindawi Advances in Civil Engineering Volume 2022, Article ID
6980221, 12 pages.
3. Nana Li, Yongqiang Zhou, Yanqiang Zhao and Guiju Li, [Analysis of suspension
bridge tunnel-type anchorage construction on the stability of surrounding rock], E3S
Web of Conferences, 2020.
4. Wen Lina, Cheng Qiangong, Cheng Qiang and Guo Xifeng, [Stabilitation Research of
the Tunnel Anchorage of Dadu River Bridge in Luding in Yaan to Kangding
Expressway], American Journal of Civil Engineering 2017; 5(4): 196-204.

5. Serap Altın, Kubilay Kaptan and Semih S. Tezcan, [Dynamic Analysis of Suspension
Bridges and Full Scale Testing], Open Journal of Civil Engineering, 2012, 2, 58-67.
6. Farhan Farid Reshi, Priyanka Singh, Shivangi, Ravinder Kumar Tomar and S K Singh,
[Analysis and Design of Cable Stayed and Suspension Bridge Subjected to Wind
Loading], IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 889 (2021) 012059.
7. Hyunsung Lim, Seunghwan Seo, Sungjune Lee and Moonkyung Chung, [Analysis of
the passive earth pressure on a gravity‑type anchorage for a suspension bridge], Lim et
al. Geo-Engineering, 2020.
8. Feifei Shao, Zhijun Chen and Hanbin Ge, [Parametric analysis of the dynamic
characteristics of a long-span three-tower self-anchored suspension bridge with a
composite girder], Advances in Bridge Engineering (2020) 1:10.
9. Wen-Liang Qiu, Chang-Huan Kou, Chin-Sheng Kao, Shih-Wei Ma, and Jiun Yang,
[STUDY ON THE SEISMIC BEHAVIOR OF SELF-ANCHORED SUSPENSION
BRIDGES], Journal of Marine Science and Technology, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 384-391
(2012).
10. Zhijin Shen, Jianhong Jia, Nan Jiang, Bin Zhu and Wenchang Sun, [Field-Scale
Experiment on Deformation Characteristics and Bearing Capacity of Tunnel-Type
Anchorage of Suspension Bridge], Energies 2022, 15, 4772.
11. T.Subramani, J.Karthick rajan, V.R.Perumal, A.Palani and P.Kesavan, [Design and
Analysis of Suspension Bridge], International Journal of Application or Innovation in
Engineering & Management (IJAIEM), Volume 8, Issue 3, March 2019, ISSN 2319 -
4847.
12. G. M. Savaliya, A. K. Desai and S. A. Vasanwala, [THE INFLUENCE OF CABLE

SAG ON THE DYNAMIC BEHAVIOUR OF CABLE-STAYED SUSPENSION
BRIDGE WITH VARIABLE SUSPENSION TO MAIN SPAN RATIO], International
Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163, Volume: 04
Issue: 11 | Nov-2015.
13. Abhishek Pandey and Nitesh Kushwah, [Seismic Analysis and Design of Cable Stayed
Bridge with Different Cable Arrangements], International Research Journal of
Engineering and Technology (IRJET), Volume: 07 Issue: 12 | Dec 2020.

14. Luca Martinellia, Marco Domaneschia and Chunxia Shib, [Submerged Floating
Tunnels under Seismic Motion: Vibration Mitigation and Seaquake effects], Procedia
Engineering 166 ( 2016 ) 229 – 246.
15. Neel Shah, Prashant Kanzariya and Bimal Shah, [PARAMETRIC STUDY OF CABLE
STAYED BRIDGE USING DIFFERENT PYLON CONFIGUARTION], International
Journal of Engineering Applied Sciences and Technology, 2021 Vol. 5, Issue 10, ISSN
No. 2455-2143, Pages 342-348.

V18i11 57

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

V18i11 57

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

V18i11 57

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Xi’an Shiyou University, Natural Science Edition ISSN:1673-064X

Analysis of suspension bridge with different types of anchoring considering vehicular

MOHD. SHADAB1, Deepak Bandewar2, Rakesh Patel3

P.G. Scholar1, Asst. Prof.2, Assoc. Prof.3

http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

tunnel-type anchorages, and rock anchorages. Gravity-type anchorage consists of a method of

Fig 1 Anchorage types

http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

OBJECTIVES OF THE RESEARCH

http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

4 To determine the most suitable type of anchorage in comparison.

Steps of the Analysis

Fig 2 Initialization of Model

Step 3: Modelling of the section a working drawing

http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

Fig 3 Modeling of Sectional Drawing

Fig 4 Model Structure

http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

Fig 5 Defining Bridge Section

Step 5: Defining Properties of Material

Fig 6 Defining Properties of Material

http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

Step 6: Assigning tendons to precast segmental beam.

http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

Fig 7 Defining and Assigning Bridge Tendons

http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

Fig 8 Defining Load Pattern

Step 8: Defining Vehicular Loading

http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

Fig 9 Vehicular Loading

Step 9: Defining Seismic loading as per IS 1893:2016 Part I

http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

Fig 10 Defining Seismic Loading

Step 10: Analyzing the stress on the structure

http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

Fig 11 Running Load Cases

Fig 12 Stress Analysis

Flow Chart of the Study

http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

Fig 13 Flow Chart of the Study

Table 1 Geometrical Description

Dimension of the model

Web thickness 300 mm

Construction joint for crash barrier portion 3000 mm

Opening 800 x 900 mm

Anchorage Tunnel and Gravity

Haunch 100 x 100 mm

Table 2 Shear Force in kN

Bridge with Tunnel type anchorage 476.098

Bridge with Gravity type anchorage 379.207

http://xisdxjxsu.asia VOLUME 18 ISSUE 11 November 2022 606-625

Bridge with Gravity type anchorage

Bridge with Tunnel type anchorage

0 100 200 300 400 500

Table 3 Maximum Deflection in mm

Bridge with Tunnel type anchorage 621.098

Bridge with Gravity type anchorage 598.992

Bridge with Gravity type anchorage

Bridge with Tunnel type anchorage