The 3rd International Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Disaster Mitigation 2016 (ICEEDM-III 2016)

Earthquake Response of Cable Stayed Bridge with Steel Girder using

Response Spectrum and Time History Analysis During and After
Construction with Cable Tuning case study Merah Putih Bridge,
Ambon, Indonesia
Hedy Rahadian, Iwan Zarkasi, Ariono Dhanis
Ministry of Public Works & Housing, Highway Directorate General, Bridge Directorate, Sixth Floor of Sapta Taruna Building, Pattimura Street No. 20, Kebayoran
Baru-Jakarta Selatan 12110, Telp (021)7251544, Fax (021) 7247283

Abstract

The earthquake happened during construction of Merah Putih Bridge has change the geometry of the structure before
closing of twin fan cable stayed bridge in 9 cm. A study is needed to address the behavior of the cable stayed bridge
structure near to closing of the final segment because it is very critical stage that if earthquake struck then there will be
additional adjustment work to get the as planed final geometry. Cable tuning also take into account in this analysis using
software SAP 2000 version 17 to represent the existing stiffness. Response spectrum that is used based on national code
that will be released, RSNI3 2833-201X with hazard level of 1000 years earthquake with probability exceeded 7% within
75 years. Since there is no local time history record, we use El Centro earthquake accelerogram. Modal analysis also
presented to convey clearer idea. The limitation is the concrete deck is assumed to withstand tension stress more than it is
tensile strength just as its compression strength. The steel girder is modeled as beam/frame element and the concrete
deck is modelled as shell, the pylon is modelled as frame, pile cap as shell and bored pile as frame with 0,5 lateral
support assumption.

Keywords: Earthquake, Cable Stayed Bridge, Response Spectrum, Time History, Cable Tuning

1. INTRODUCTION

The behavior of the structure during earthquake need to be studied because the variation of earthquake behavior
during construction stage is critical especially during near close to closure segment. Indonesia ministry of public works
has released the earthquake regulation RSNI3 2833-201X with hazard level of 1000 years with probability exceeded 7%
within 75 years. The development of structural analysis software to
simulate bridge behavior during earthquake also evolved, now it is up to response spectrum analysis and time history that
can be done during a minute.

2. STRUCTURAL DATA

Reinforced Concrete Slab & Pylon fc’ = 40 MPa, Ec = 4700.(40)^½ = 29725 MPa, w = 2,5 ton/m3 Pylon Base, Pile
Caps & Pile fc’= 30 MPa, Ec = 4700.(30)^ ½ = 25743 MPa, w = 2,5 ton/m3 Steel reinforcement fy = 412 MPa (D>D13),
fy = 280 MPa (D<D10), Es = 200.000 MPa Geotechnical Parameters:
1. Unit weight = 1,8 ton/m3
2. Internal friction angle = 30ᵒ
3. Cohesion = 0
4. Ed (deformation modules) = 1700 kg/cm2
5. Skin Friction = 20 kPa
Steel structure girder = A709M Grade 345 Steel or Equivalent Material Fy = 345 MPa, E = 200.000 MPa, allowable
deck stresses, maximum compressive stress at transfer/maximum tensile stress at transfer = 0,55fy = 189 MPa, w = 7,85
ton/m3
Stay cable, nominal area of strand = As = 150 mm2, Ultimate tensile stress = Fu = 1860 MPa, Allowable Stress
= 0,45 Fu = 837 MPa, w = 7,85 ton/m3, Esc = 195.000 MPa
Construction Load:
Weight of lifting gantry = 40 tons
Weight of deck segment:

Segment S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
Weight (ton) 53,4 53,4 54 56,2 56,2 56,2 55,6
Segment M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7
Weight (ton) 53,4 53,4 53,8 55,1 55,1 55,1 55,3
Total span = 300 m, mid span = 150 m, side span = 75 m

3. EARTHQUAKE DATA

To get the real earthquake is difficult, so that we only try to use the response spectrum from the code developed
from the government, RSNI3 2833-201X with hazard level of 1000 years earthquake with
probability exceeded 7% within 75 years.

Fig 1. Peak ground acceleration = 0,5g

 0.05
0.10
1.20
0.90 1.00

0.60 0.70
0.50

Fig 2. Response spectrum acceleration 0,2 second = Ss = 1 g

0.50
0.05

0.20
0.10
0.15

0.25

0.40

0.30 0.40
0.25
0.20

0.30
Response spectrum acceleration 1 second = S1 = 0,45 g
Amplification factor for PGA = F PGA = 1
Amplification factor for 0,2 second response spectrum = Fa = 1
Amplification factor for 1 second response spectrum = Fv = 1,35
SDS=FaSS

Sa =SD1/T

SD1=FvS1

As=FPGAPGA

0 0,2 Ts =SD1/SDS 1 Periode (detik)

To =0,2Ts
As = F PGA x PGA = 1 x 0,5g = 0,5g
SDS = Fa x Ss = 1 x 1g = 1g
SD1 = Fv x S1 = 1,35 x 0,45g = 0,6075g
Ts = SD1/SDS = 0,6075g/1g = 0,6075 detik
To = 0,2Ts = 0,2.0,6075 detik = 0,1215 detik

4. MODEL (OVERALL BEHAVIOR/AFTER COMPLETION)

The case study of a structure that is used is Merah Putih Bridge, consist of twin fan cable stayed bridge. The
foundation is assumed to be 0,5 fixity length (fixed). Cable force that is used is based on construction final stage data
(final cable tuning).
 Fig 3. Model of the Merah Putih Bridge

Fig 4. Model of Merah Putih Bridge Extruded

5. CABLE TUNING METHOD

The final tension that is released from site construction inputted in the analysis (final stressing record).
Pylon 1:
 CHECK LIFT OFF
%
Cable Check lift-off Force/ Strand
Segment No ID DATE UTS
[ kN ] [ Ton ] 27.9
C1 A 9-Feb-16 1568.75 6.82 24.45
C1 B 9-Feb-16 1347.53 5.86 21.00
1
M1 A 9-Feb-16 1168.76 5.08 18.21
M1 B 9-Feb-16 1238.88 5.39 19.31
C2 A 9-Feb-16 1362.33 5.92 21.23
C2 B 9-Feb-16 1407.75 6.12 21.94
2
M2 A 9-Feb-16 1181.57 5.14 18.41
M2 B 9-Feb-16 1442.81 6.27 22.48
C3 A 9-Feb-16 1359.37 5.44 19.49
C3 B 9-Feb-16 1639.76 6.56 23.51
3
M3 A 9-Feb-16 1384.01 5.54 19.84
M3 B 9-Feb-16 1448.77 5.80 20.77
C4 A 9-Feb-16 1519.1 6.08 21.78
C4 B 9-Feb-16 1874.4 7.50 26.87
4
M4 A 9-Feb-16 1300.25 5.20 18.64
M4 B 9-Feb-16 1318.93 5.28 18.91
C5 A 9-Feb-16 2081.47 7.71 27.63
C5 B 9-Feb-16 1954.91 7.24 25.95
5
M5 A 9-Feb-16 2046.06 7.58 27.16
M5 B 9-Feb-16 1655.37 6.13 21.97
C6A 9-Feb-16 2134.01 7.11 25.50
C6 B 9-Feb-16 2027.77 6.76 24.23
6
M6 A 9-Feb-16 2412.39 8.04 28.82
M6 B 9-Feb-16 2524.1 8.41 30.16
C7 A 9-Feb-16 1982.29 5.66 20.30
C7 B 9-Feb-16 2159.22 6.17 22.11
7
M7 A 9-Feb-16 2791.05 7.97 28.58
M7 B 9-Feb-16 2687.72 7.68 27.52
Figure 3
Pylon 2:
CHECK LIFT OFF
%
Cable Check lift-off Force/ Strand
Segment No ID DATE UTS
[ kN ] [ Ton ] 27.9
C1 A 9-Feb-16 1367.87 5.95 21.32
C1 B 9-Feb-16 1103.96 4.80 17.20
1
M1 A 9-Feb-16 1137.32 4.94 17.72
M1 B 9-Feb-16 1644.61 7.15 25.63
 C2 A 9-Feb-16 1173.93 5.10 18.29
C2 B 9-Feb-16 988.26 4.30 15.40
2
M2 A 9-Feb-16 1272.65 5.53 19.83
M2 B 9-Feb-16 1232.06 5.36 19.20
C3 A 9-Feb-16 1214.46 4.86 17.41
C3 B 9-Feb-16 1252.29 5.01 17.95
3
M3 A 9-Feb-16 1537.22 6.15 22.04
M3 B 9-Feb-16 1268.52 5.07 18.19
C4 A 9-Feb-16 1882.16 7.53 26.98
C4 B 9-Feb-16 1760.17 7.04 25.24
4
M4 A 9-Feb-16 1584.64 6.34 22.72
M4 B 9-Feb-16 1325.37 5.30 19.00
C5 A 9-Feb-16 1827.09 6.77 24.25
C5 B 9-Feb-16 1979.67 7.33 26.28
5
M5 A 9-Feb-16 1556.24 5.76 20.66
M5 B 9-Feb-16 1333.38 4.94 17.70
C6A 9-Feb-16 1861.05 6.20 22.23
C6 B 9-Feb-16 1924.38 6.41 22.99
6
M6 A 9-Feb-16 2087.57 6.96 24.94
M6 B 9-Feb-16 2162.88 7.21 25.84
C7 A 9-Feb-16 2176.72 6.22 22.29
C7 B 9-Feb-16 2155.42 6.16 22.07
7
M7 A 9-Feb-16 2081.93 5.95 21.32
M7 B 9-Feb-16 2227.6 6.36 22.81
Figure 4 Final Cable Tuning Pylon 2 of Merah Putih Bridge
Figure 5
The deviation between the ass igned values w ith the final values is about 10%. Th is show s that SAP 2000 can be used as benchma rk in cable tun ing.

6. DYNAMIC ANALYSISDynamic Analysis (overall behavior/after completion)

Mode shape 1 (T=1,74 detik, f = 0,57 Hertz):
Mode shape 2 (T=1,56 detik, f = 0,64 Hertz):
Mode shape 3 (T=1,54 detik, f = 0,65 Hertz):

7. THE BEHAVIOR DURING EARTHQUAKE AFTER COMPLETION

By using response spectrum and cable tuning the result is as follow (deformation on the mid-girder):

The lateral deformation is 371 mm, so it is somewhat adequate if the existing deformation after the earthquake is 90 mm
(below tolerance).
The deformation of the pile cap is 213 mm, more than the tolerance 1 inch (25,4 mm)
By using time history analysis El Centro and cable tuning the result is as follow (deformation of the mid-girder):

El Centro earthquake graphic

The maximum deformation of the girder during the earthquake is 240 mm > 90 mm (the existing).
The maximum deformation of the pile cap is 160 mm > 1 inch tolerance (25,4 mm)

These are all the result if we use lateral fixity of 0,5 of the length of the pile.

8. THE BEHAVIOR OF THE STRUCTURE BEFORE CLOSING (SEGMENT 6)

The assumption that we use is that cable tuning will not change if the next girder installed.
The deformation of the girder segment 6th is 288 mm < 90 mm (the permanent deformation due to earthquake).
The deformation of the girder segment number 6th is 200 mm due to EL Centro earthquake model SAP2000.

9. CONCLUSIONS
1. It is recommended to use coding or software that we develop by ourselves so that we can control the input,
the result and the behavior of the cable non linier analysis and also the iteration procedure.
2. It is recommended to learn/study more about SAP 2000 in the area of cable design.
3. It is recommended to use MIDAS Civil software as replacement of SAP 2000 that might result better output.
4. It is recommended to analyze soil structure interaction by taking into account lateral spring rigidity so that the
lateral deformation will not this high according to the guessing lateral pile fixity.
5. The analysis of staged construction in SAP 2000 cannot be used because the iteration is stopped in the stage
number 1st (the erection of the first girder).
6. The overall bridge including the approach bridge should be modelled because the lateral rigidity will
influence the response to earthquake.
The analysis is stopped at stage number 1

REFERENCES

[1] Caetano, Elsa de Sa: “Cable Vibrations in Cable-Stayed Bridges” IABSE, 2007
[2] Gimsing, Niels J.: “Cable Supported Bridges Concept and Design” John Wiley and Sons, 2012
[3] Svenson, Holger : “Cable Stayed Bridges 40 Years of Experience Worldwide” Ernst & Sohn A Wiley
Company, 2012
[4] Thomas, Blesson and Thakkar, Sonal,: “Analysis and Design of Cable Stayed Bridge” Lambert Academic
Publishing, 2011