Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 47 (2011) 237–246

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Finite Elements in Analysis and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/finel

Nonlinear static and dynamic analysis of cable structures

Huu-Tai Thai, Seung-Eock Kim n
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Sejong University, 98 Gunja Dong Gwangjin Gu, Seoul 143-747, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e in f o abstract

Article history: This paper presents a catenary cable element for the nonlinear analysis of cable structures subjected to
Received 14 June 2010 static and dynamic loadings. The element stiffness matrix and element nodal forces, which account for
Received in revised form self-weight and pretension effects, are derived based on exact analytical expressions of elastic catenary.
11 October 2010
Cables encountered in cable networks as well as cable-supported bridges can be modeled using the
Accepted 24 October 2010
Available online 24 November 2010
proposed element. An incremental-iterative solution based on the Newmark direct integration method
and the Newton–Raphson method is adopted for solving the nonlinear equation of motion. The accuracy
Keywords: and reliability of the present element are verified by comparing the predictions with those generated by
Catenary element commercial finite element package SAP2000, and the results given by other authors using different
Cable structures
analytical or numerical approaches.
Nonlinear analysis
& 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Dynamic analysis

1. Introduction instead of using many two-node elements. The multi-node element

In recent decades, cable element has been widely used in
tension structures such as cable-supported bridges and roofs of
structures covering large unobstructed areas due to their aesthetic
appearances as well as the structural advantages of cables. Since
the highly nonlinear behavior exhibits in this element, the effects of
flexibility and large deflection in the cable should be considered in
establishing the equilibrium equations. In general, the cable
member can be modeled using two different approaches: (1) the
finite element approach based on the polynomial interpolation
functions and (2) the analytical approach based on analytical
expressions of elastic catenary.
In the first method, the interpolation functions are adopted to
represent the nonlinear effects of the cable. This method has been
employed to formulate two-node element, multi-node element,
and curved element with rotational degrees of freedom. The two-
node element is the most common element used in the modeling of
cables, and was adopted by several researches [1–3]. This element
is only suitable for modeling the cables with high pretension. To
account for the sag effect, the elastic modulus is modified by the
equivalent modulus proposed by Ernst [4]. Several researchers
have adopted the equivalent modulus for modeling the cables,
which have been proved to be sufficiently accurate for the cases of
cable under relatively high stress and small length [5]. For cables
with large sag, a series of straight elements is used to model the
curved geometry of cables. The multi-node element was developed
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: + 82 2 3408 3291; fax: + 82 2 3408 3332.
E-mail addresses: taispkt@yahoo.com (H.-T. Thai), sekim@sejong.ac.kr
(S.-E. Kim).
is based on the higher order polynomials for the interpolation
functions [6–8]. Since the formulations of this element are complex
expressions, the tangent stiffness matrix, and nodal force vector are
obtained using the isoparametric formulation. These elements give
accurate results for cables with small sag. When the large sag cable
is modeled by several elements, the continuity of slopes is violated.
The continuity of the slopes can be enforced by adding rotational
degrees of freedom to the nodes. Such an element was developed
by Gambhir and Batchelor [9]. In general, the polynomial based
elements are only appropriate to model the cable with small sag.
For cable element with large sag, it is necessary to use a large
number of elements to model the curved geometry of cable.
Therefore it causes computational costs.
In the second approach, exact analytical expressions of elastic
catenary are used to describe the realistic behavior of cables. This
method was originally proposed by O’Brien and Francis [10] and later
developed by Jayaraman and Knudson [11], Wang et al. [12], Andreu
et al. [13], Yang and Tsay [14], and Such et al. [15]. In this method, the
curved cables are modeled by a single two-node catenary element
without internal joints. This element can be used to model the small
sag cables in cable-stayed bridges as well as large sag cables in
suspension bridges. Compared to the finite element method, the
analytical approach has some advantages such as requiring fewer
number of degree of freedom and exactly considering the nonlinear
effects of the cable. The catenary cable element presented in this
study is derived based on the second approach.
The purpose of this paper is to develop a spatial two-node catenary
cable element for the nonlinear analysis of cable structures subjected
to static and dynamic loadings. The tangent stiffness matrix and
internal force vector of the element are derived explicitly based on the
exact analytical expressions of elastic catenary. Self-weight of the

0168-874X/$ - see front matter & 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.finel.2010.10.005
238 H.-T. Thai, S.-E. Kim / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 47 (2011) 237–246

cables can be directly considered without any approximations. The and the boundary conditions at the two ends of cable are
effect of pre-tension of cable is also included in the element
xð0Þ ¼ yð0Þ ¼ zð0Þ ¼ 0 ð5aÞ
formulation. It should be noted that most of the finite element
package still lack suitable cable element; therefore the proposed
element is also implemented in a computer program for practical use xðL0 Þ ¼ lx , yðL0 Þ ¼ ly , zðL0 Þ ¼ lz ð5bÞ
in design. An incremental-iterative solution based on the Newmark
Substituting Eqs. (1)–(3) into Eq. (4) and applying the boundary
direct integration method and the Newton–Raphson method is
conditions in Eq. (5), the projected lengths of the cable can be
adopted for solving the nonlinear equation of motion. Several
derived as follows:
numerical examples are presented and discussed to illustrate the
 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
accuracy and efficiency of the proposed element in predicting the F1 L0 F1
lx ¼   ln F12 þF22 þ ðwL0 F3 Þ2 þ wL0 F3
static and dynamic responses of cable structures. EA w
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
ln F12 þ F22 þ F32 F3 ð6aÞ
2. Catenary cable element

 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
To accurately simulate the realistic behavior of cable structures, F2 L0 F2
the cable element presented in this paper is derived based on the ly ¼   ln F12 þF22 þ ðwL0 F3 Þ2 þ wL0 F3
EA w
exact analytical expressions of the elastic catenary element. It is qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
assumed that the cable is perfectly flexible with the self-weight ln F1 þ F22 þ F32 F3
2 ð6bÞ
distributed along its length, and the cross-sectional area of the
cable is kept constant. Fig. 1 shows the cable suspended between
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
two points I and J which have the Cartesian coordinates (0, 0, 0) and F3 L0 wL20 1
(lx, ly, lz), respectively. The Lagrangian coordinates of the unde- lz ¼  þ þ F12 þ F22 þðwL0 F3 Þ2  F12 þ F22 þ F32 ð6cÞ
EA 2EA w
formed and deformed configurations are s and p. The equations for
where L0 is unstressed length of the cable. The above expressions
the equilibrium condition of the cable can be expressed as follows:
  for lx, ly, and lz can be rewritten in terms of the end forces (F1, F2, F3)
dx as
T ¼ F1 ð1aÞ
dp
lx ¼ f ðF1 , F2 , F3 Þ ð7aÞ

dy
T ¼ F2 ð1bÞ ly ¼ gðF1 , F2 , F3 Þ ð7bÞ
dp
  lz ¼ hðF1 , F2 , F3 Þ ð7cÞ
dz
T ¼ F3 þws ð1cÞ The tangent stiffness matrix and corresponding internal force
dp
vector of the element can be derived using an iteration procedure in
where F1, F2 and F3 are the projected components of cable tension in solving Eq. (6). By differentiating both sides of Eq. (6), the following
the x-, y- and z-axis, respectively; w the self-weight of the cable; equations are obtained as:
and T the cable tension at the Lagrangian coordinate s given by
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi @f @f @f
dlx ¼ dF1 þ dF2 þ dF3 ð8aÞ
TðsÞ ¼ F12 þ F22 þðF3 wsÞ2 ð2Þ @F1 @F2 @F3

The cable tension T is related to the strain e by Hook’s law as

@g @g @g
    dly ¼ dF1 þ dF2 þ dF3 ð8bÞ
dpds dp @F1 @F2 @F3
T ¼ EAe ¼ EA ¼ EA 1 ð3Þ
ds ds
where E and A are the elastic modulus and cross-sectional area of @h @h @h
dlz ¼ dF1 þ dF2 þ dF3 ð8cÞ
the cable. The relationships between the Lagrangian coordinate s @F1 @F2 @F3
and the Cartesian coordinate are as follows: or in matrix form
Z Z
dx dx dp 8 9 2 38 9 8 9
xðsÞ ¼ ds ¼ ds ð4aÞ < dlx >
> = f11 f12 f13 < > dF1 >
= < dF1 >
> =
ds dp ds
dly ¼ 6 4 21 f22
f 7
f23 5 dF2 ¼ F dF2 ð9Þ
Z Z >
: dl > ; > > >
: dF >
dy dy dp z f31 f32 f33 : dF3 ; 3
;
yðsÞ ¼ ds ¼ ds ð4bÞ
ds dp ds
where F is the flexibility matrix given as follows:
Z Z
dz dz dp    
zðsÞ ¼ ds ¼ ds ð4cÞ L0 1 Tj þF6 F2 1 1
ds dp ds f11 ¼  þ log þ 1  ð10aÞ
EA w Ti F3 w Ti ðTi F3 Þ Tj ðTj þ F6 Þ

z    
F6 F1 F2 1 1 F1 1 1
F5 f12 ¼ f21 ¼  , f13 ¼ f31 ¼ 
y w Ti ðTi F3 Þ Tj ðTj þ F6 Þ w Tj Ti
J
F4 ð10bÞ
lx lz
F3 F2    
L0 1 Tj þF6 F2 1 1
f22 ¼  þ log þ 2  ð10cÞ
w ly EA w Ti F3 w Ti ðTi F3 Þ Tj ðTj þ F6 Þ
F1

I x    
F2 1 1 L0 1 F6 F3
f23 ¼ f32 ¼  , f33 ¼   þ ð10dÞ
Fig. 1. Three-dimensional catenary cable element. w Tj Ti EA w Tj Ti
 H.-T. Thai, S.-E. Kim / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 47 (2011) 237–246 239

where Ti and Tj are the cable tension at nodes I and J, defined as 3. Procedure for computing the stiffness matrix
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Ti ¼ F12 þF22 þ F32 ð11aÞ The tangent stiffness matrix and internal force vector of cable
element are evaluated using an iteration procedure. This procedure
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
requires the initial values of end forces (F1, F2, F3). Based on
Tj ¼ F42 þF52 þ F62 ð11bÞ
the well-known catenary expressions, the initial values of end
and nodal forces (F4, F5, F6) at node J are obtained from equilibrium forces are obtained as follows [11]:
equations as wlx
F1 ¼  ð19aÞ
F4 ¼ F1 ð12aÞ 2l0

F5 ¼ F2 ð12bÞ wly

F2 ¼  ð19bÞ
2l0
F6 ¼ F3 þ wL0 ð12cÞ
 
The stiffness matrix is obtained by taking the inverse of the w coshl0
F3 ¼ lz þ L0 ð19cÞ
flexibility matrix F as 2 sinhl0
2 31 in which
f11 f12 f13
6 7 8
K ¼ F 1 ¼ 4 f21 f22 f23 5 ð13Þ > 106 if ðl2x þl2y Þ ¼ 0
>
>
f31 f32 f33 >
>
>
< 0:2 if L0 r lx þly þ lz
> 2 2 2 2

The tangent stiffness matrix and corresponding internal force l0 ¼ v u

ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
! ð20Þ
>
vector of cable element can be expressed in terms of the six degrees >u
>
> t3 L0 lz 1
2 2
>
> if L20 4l2x þl2y þ l2z
of freedom as >
: l2x þ l2y
 
K K
KT ¼ ð14Þ
K K
The iteration procedure for obtaining tangent stiffness matrix

T and internal force vector of cable element is briefly presented as
Fint ¼ F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 ð15Þ follows:
Once the tangent stiffness matrix and internal force vector are Step 1 Input w, E, A, L0, nodes I(xi, yi, zi) and J(xj, yj, zj)
determined, the cable length S and the cable sag zs (Fig. 2) can be Step 2 Calculate lx0 ¼xj–xi, ly0 ¼yj–yi and lz0 ¼zj–zi
obtained as follows [11,14]: Step 3 Initialize end forces (F1, F2, F3) using Eq. (19)
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Step 4 Update (lx, ly, lz) using Eq. (6)
2

sinh l Step 5 Calculate misclosure vector dL ¼ ðlx0 lx Þ ðly0 ly Þ
S ¼ l2z þðl2x þ l2y Þ 2
ð16Þ ðlz0 lz Þg T
l
Step 6 If dL is smaller than the preset tolerances, calculate KT
zs ¼ lL½3 þ ð12xÞl sin yxð1xÞ=3 ð17Þ using Eq. (14) and Fint using Eq. (15). Otherwise continue to
next step
where Step 7 Calculate the correction vector of end forces dF¼F  1dL
w qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi Step 8 Update the end forces Fi + 1 ¼Fi + dF and go to Step 4
l¼ ðl2x þ l2y Þ=ðF12 þ F22 Þ ð18aÞ
2 When the initial cable tension T0 is given instead of the
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi unstressed cable length L0, a similar iteration procedure can be
L¼ l2x þ l2y þ l2z ð18bÞ adopted to determine the unstressed cable length. The iteration
procedure for obtaining the unstressed cable length is summarized
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi as follows:
x ¼ x= l2x þ l2y ð18cÞ Step 1 Input w, E, A, nodes I(xi, yi, zi) and J(xj, yj, zj)
Step 2 Calculate lx0 ¼xj–xi, ly0 ¼yj–yi and lz0 ¼zj–zi
An elastic–plastic hinge model is adopted herein for represent-
Step 3 Initialize unstressed length L0 and end forces (F1, F2, F3) as
ing the inelastic behavior of cable element. According this model,
follows:
the spread of plasticity of cable element is assumed to be lumped at
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
two ends of element, while the whole element remains elastic. If L0 ¼ l2x0 þ l2y0 þ l2z0 ð21aÞ
the axial force of cable is greater than the yield force Py ¼Asy, the
elastic modulus of the cable element will become zero and the axial
force of cable element will be equal to the yield force Py. lx0
F1 ¼  T0 ð21bÞ
L0

I x ly0
F2 ¼  T0 ð21cÞ
θ L0
x tanθ
lz0
F3 ¼  T0 ð21dÞ
L0

Step 4 Update (lx, ly, lz) using Eq. (6)

zs
Step 5 Calculate misclosure vector dL ¼ ðlx0 lx Þ ðly0 ly Þ
J ðlz0 lz ÞgT
Step 6 If dL is smaller than the given tolerance, the current L0 is
Fig. 2. The sag zs of the inclined cable. unstressed cable length. Otherwise continue to next step
240 H.-T. Thai, S.-E. Kim / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 47 (2011) 237–246

Step 7 Calculate [C] by differentiating Eq. (6) with respect to F2, force {DR} as
F3 and L0 as ^ DDDg ¼ fDRg
½Kf ð33Þ
2 3
@f @f @f
6 @F2 @F3 @L0 7 where the residual force {DR} is determined based on the total
6 7 external force {F}, inertial force, damping force, and updated
6 @g @g @g 7
6 7 internal force {Fint} as
½C  ¼ 6 7 ð22Þ
6 @F2 @F3 @L0 7
6 7 € n þ 1 g½CfD
_ n þ 1 gfFint g
4 @h @h @h 5 fDRg ¼ fFn þ 1 g½MfD ð34Þ
@F2 @F3 @L0
Once the convergence criterion is satisfied, the structural

T
Step 8 Calculate dF2 dF3 dL0 ¼ ½C1 dL response is updated for the next time step as
Step 9 Update F2 ¼ F2 + dF2, F3 ¼F3 + dF3, L0 ¼L0 + dL0 and go to fDDk þ 1 g ¼ fDDk g þ fDDDg ð35Þ
Step 4
fDn þ 1 g ¼ fDn g þ fDDk þ 1 g ð36Þ

4. Solution algorithm n o n o 2 n o
D _n þ
_ nþ1 ¼  D DDk þ 1 ð37Þ
Dt
For the nonlinear static analysis, the residual forces in each load
n o n o 4 n o n o
increment can be dissipated using the Newton–Raphson method. D €n 
€ nþ1 ¼  D _ n þ 4 DDk þ 1
D ð38Þ
For the nonlinear time–history analysis, an incremental-iterative Dt Dt2
solution based on the Newmark direct integration method and the
Newton–Raphson method is employed to solve the nonlinear
equation of motion. The incremental equation of motion of a 5. Numerical verifications
structure can be written as
A computer program is developed based on the above-
€ þ½CfDDg
½MfDDg _ þ ½KfDDg ¼ fDFg ð23Þ mentioned algorithm. The flow chart of the proposed program
€ ½DD,
where ½DD, _ and [DD] are the vectors of incremental accel- for the application of the Newmark method and the Newton–
eration, velocity, and displacement, respectively; [M], [C], and [K] Raphson method is illustrated in Fig. 3. Two earthquake records of
are the mass, damping, and tangent stiffness matrices, respec- the El Centro and the Loma Prieta as shown in Fig. 4 are used as
tively; {DF} is the external load increment vector. The viscous ground excitation in the dynamic analysis. Their peak ground
damping matrix [C] can be defined as accelerations and time steps are listed in Table 1. In the dynamic
time–history analysis, the mass- and stiffness-proportional damp-
½C ¼ aM ½M þ aK ½K ð24Þ ing factors are chosen based on the first two modes of the structure
where aM and aK are mass- and stiffness-proportional damping so that the equivalent viscous damping ratio is equal to 5%. Several
factors, respectively. With the adoption of the average acceleration numerical examples are presented and discussed to verify the
method of the Newmark family (g ¼1/2, b ¼1/4), the incremental accuracy and efficiency of the proposed program in predicting the
acceleration and velocity at the first iteration of each time step can nonlinear response of cable structures subjected to static and
be written as dynamic loadings. For the verification purpose, the predictions
n o obtained from proposed program are compared with available
4
4 n_ o n€ o
DD€ ¼ 2 DD  D n 2 D n ð25Þ results reported in the literature, and those generated by SAP2000.
Dt Dt
It should be noted that the cable element provided by SAP2000
n o 2
n_ o ignores the self-weight and inelastic effects, whereas the proposed
DD_ ¼ DD 2 D n ð26Þ element can consider these effects.
Dt
Substituting Eqs. (25) and (26) into Eq. (23), the incremental
displacement can be calculated from Previous time step
½Kf ^
^ DDg ¼ fDFg ð27Þ
where ½K^ and fDFg^ are the effective stiffness matrix and incremen- Form the tangent stiffness matrix
tally effective force vector, respectively, given as
h i 4 2
K^ ¼ ½M  þ ½C  þ ½K  ð28Þ Solve for the increment displacement
Dt2 Dt
Next iteration
Current time step

n o
4 n o n o
DF^ ¼ DF þ ½M þ2½C  D _ n þ 2½M  D€n ð29Þ Update element force
Dt
At the first iteration of each time step, the total displacement,
velocity, and acceleration at the time t + Dt is updated based on the Calculate the residual force R
incremental displacement vector {DD} as
fDn þ 1 g ¼ fDn g þ fDDg ð30Þ No
Check convergence of R?
n o n o 2
Yes
_ nþ1
D _n þ
¼ D DD ð31Þ
Dt · ··
Update structural response D,D,D
n o n o 4 n o

€ nþ1
D €n 
¼ D _ n þ 4 DD
D ð32Þ
Dt Dt2
Next time step
For the second and subsequent iterations of each time step,
the structural system is solved under the effect of the residual Fig. 3. Flow chart of the proposed program.
 H.-T. Thai, S.-E. Kim / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 47 (2011) 237–246 241

z
1.2 P = 35.586 kN
x 3
1
0.8 30.48 m
Acceleration (g)

0.4 2
121.92 m

0 152.4 m
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
304.8 m
-0.4
Fig. 5. Isolated cable under concentrated load.
-0.8

-1.2 Time (s) Table 2

Initial properties of isolated cable under concentrated load.
1.2
Item Data

0.8 Cross-sectional area 5.484 cm2

Elastic modulus 13100.0 kN/cm2
Cable self-weight 46.12 N/m
Acceleration (g)

0.4 Sag under self-weight at load point 29.276 m

Unstressed cable length of sections 1–2 125.88 m
0 Unstressed cable length of sections 2–3 186.85 m
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 40
-0.4

Table 3
-0.8 Comparison of displacements of isolated cable under concentrated load.

-1.2 Researcher Element type Displacements (m)

Time (s)
Vertical Horizontal
Fig. 4. Earthquake records. (a) El Centro and (b) Loma Prieta.
Michalos and Birnstiel [16] Elastic straight  5.472  0.845
O’Brien and Francis [10] Elastic catenary  5.627  0.860
Jayaraman and Knudson [11] Elastic straight  5.471  0.845
Jayaraman and Knudson [11] Elastic catenary  5.626  0.859
Table 1 Tibert [17] Elastic catenary  5.626  0.859
Peak ground acceleration and its corresponding time step of earthquake records. Andreu et al. [13] Elastic catenary  5.626  0.860
Yang and Tsay [14] Elastic catenary  5.625  0.859
Earthquake PGA (g) Time SAP2000 Elastic catenary  5.626  0.860
step (s) Present work Elastic catenary  5.626  0.859

El-Centro (1940) (Array, #9, USGS Station 117) 0.319 0.020

Loma Prieta (1989) (Capitola, 000, CDMG Station 47125) 0.529 0.005

40
35 ux uz
Present
Applied load, P (kN)

5.1. Static analysis 30

SAP2000
25
Example 1. The first example is an isolated cable spanning of
304.8 m between two supports at the same elevation, where the 20
sag at the mid-span is 30.48 m. This problem was first considered 15
by Michalos and Birnstiel [16], and later analyzed by O’Brien and
Francis [10], Jayaraman and Knudson [11], Tibert [17], Andreu et al. 10
[13], and Yang and Tsay [14]. The initial configuration and the data 5
for this structure are presented in Fig. 5 and Table 2. Table 3 shows
the comparison of displacements generated by the proposed 0
program, SAP2000 and other researchers. It can be seen that the 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6
results obtained by the proposed element are almost identical with Displacement at node 2 (m)
those predicted by other authors. It should be noted that the set of
Fig. 6. Load–displacement curves of isolated cable under concentrated load.
catenary type elements shows a more deformable behavior than
the straight type element. Moreover, the straight type element
can achieve the same level of accuracy of the catenary type
elements when using much more elements per member. The as experimentally tested by Lewis et al. [18]. The structure consists
load–displacement curves obtained by the proposed program of a grid in a hyperbolic paraboloid form with 31 cable segments
and SAP2000 are compared in Fig. 6. A good agreement is obtained. subjected to concentrated load of 15.7 N at some joints. The elastic
Example 2. A hyperbolic paraboloid cable network as shown in modulus and cross-sectional area of cables are 128.3 kN/mm2 and
Fig. 7 has been numerically analyzed by several researches as well 0.785 mm2. The cables are pretensioned to carry 200 N prior to the
242 H.-T. Thai, S.-E. Kim / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 47 (2011) 237–246

8 application of external load. Lewis et al. [18] and Sufian and

13
18 Tempelman [19] analyzed this problem using the dynamic relaxa-
23
x tion method and minimum energy method, respectively. Table 4
3
7 shows a comparison of the vertical displacements obtained by the
2
y 6 12 present work with those predicted by the other authors using

0.45 m
1 17 different numerical methods. It can be seen that the proposed
z 5 11 22 element can accurately predict the behavior of cable with the
10 16
4 21 maximum difference of 2.78%.
15 26
9 Example 3. A spatial cable network of plan dimension
4x0 20 m
.4 m 14 25 0.8 24 m  16 m consists of 38 pretensioned cable segments spaced
19 at 4 m  4 m grid as shown in Fig. 8. The structure has mirror
24
m symmetry about both centerlines, and the z-coordinates for a
0.9 0.4 quarter of the structure are given in Table 5. The initial geometry of
m 3x
the structure is achieved by means of the pretension force of 90 kN
in the x-direction and 30 kN in the y-direction. The structure
Fig. 7. Hyperbolic paraboloid net. is subjected to a vertically concentrated load of 6.8 kN at all
internal nodes. The cross-sectional area of cables is 350 mm2 in
the x-direction and 120 mm2 in the y-direction, and the elastic
Table 4
Comparison of vertical displacements (mm) of hyperbolic paraboloid net.
modulus of all cables is 160 kN/mm2. The displacements obtained
in present study are compared with those predicted by Lewis [20]
Node Experiment Dynamic relaxation Minimum energy Present as shown in Table 5. It is observed that the results predicted by the
(Ref. [18]) (Ref. [18]) (Ref. [19]) present study are very close to those given by Lewis.
Example 4. The saddle net shown in Fig. 9 consists of 142
5 19.50 19.30(  1.03)a 19.30(  1.03) 19.56(0.31)
6 25.30 25.30(0.00) 25.50(0.79) 25.70(1.58) pretensioned cable segments spaced at 5 m  5 m grid. The
7 22.80 23.00(0.88) 23.10(1.32) 23.37(2.50) structure has mirror symmetry about both centerlines, and the
10 25.40 25.90(1.97) 25.80(1.57) 25.91(2.01) z-coordinates for a quarter of the structure are given in Table 6. All
11 33.60 33.80(0.60) 34.00(1.19) 34.16(1.67) cable segments have the same pretension force of 60 kN. The
12 28.80 29.40(2.08) 29.40(2.08) 29.60(2.78)
15 25.20 26.40(4.76) 25.70(1.98) 25.86(2.62)
cross-sectional area and elastic modulus of all cables are 306 mm2
16 30.60 31.70(3.59) 31.20(1.96) 31.43(2.71) and 147 kN/mm2. The saddle net is subjected to the external loads
17 21.00 21.90(4.29) 21.10(0.48) 21.56(2.67) of 1 kN in the x- and z-directions at all the free nodes on one-half of
20 21.00 21.90(4.29) 21.10(0.48) 21.57(2.71) the net. They are nodes 11-15, 22-26, 33-37, 44-48, 55-59,
21 19.80 20.50(3.54) 19.90(0.51) 20.14(1.72)
66-70 and 77-81. Table 6 shows the comparison of the nodal
22 14.20 14.80(4.23) 14.30(0.70) 14.55(2.46)
displacements obtained by the proposed program and Kwan [21]. It
a
Numbers in parentheses are the percentage error with respect to experiment can be seen that the results obtained in present work are in good
values. agreement with those predicted by Kwan.

x 0m
= 24. 12 5.2. Dynamic time–history analysis
y 6x4.0 11 19
z 4 5
10 18 26
17 Example 5. An inclined cable subjected to earthquake loading is
2 3 9 25
8 16 shown in Fig. 10 with its associated data. The horizontal displace-
6 1 7 15 24 ment responses of the cable obtained by the proposed program and
4x 14 23 31
4.0 13 SAP2000 for the nonlinear elastic analysis are compared in Fig. 11
22
= 20 21 for two different earthquakes. It can be seen that a strong
16 30
.0
m agreement of displacement responses of the cable generated using
28 29 the proposed program and SAP2000 is obtained. A comparison of
27
the peak displacement responses is shown Table 7. It can be
Fig. 8. Spatial net. observed that the proposed program and SAP2000 give nearly

Table 5
Comparison of displacements (mm) of spatial net.

Node z-coord. Lewis [20] Present

dx dy dz dx dy dz

1 1000.0
2 2000.0
3 3000.0
6 0
7 819.5  5.14 0.42 30.41  5.03(2.14)b 0.41(2.38) 29.86(1.81)
8 1409.6  2.26 0.47 17.70  2.23(1.33) 0.46(2.13) 17.29(2.32)
9 1676.9 0  2.27  3.62 0  2.31(  1.76)  3.61(0.28)
13 0
14 687.0  4.98 0 43.49  4.92(1.20) 0 42.85(1.47)
15 1147.8  2.55 0 44.47  2.55(0.00) 0 44.26(0.47)
16 1317.6 0 0 41.65 0 0 42.08(  1.03)

b
Numbers in parentheses are the percentage error with respect to Lewis [20] values.
 H.-T. Thai, S.-E. Kim / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 47 (2011) 237–246 243

identical results with the maximum difference of 0.24%. The effect
of cable self-weight on the dynamic response of the proposed
element is also investigated. Fig. 12 shows the displacement
responses of the cable subjected to El Centro earthquake for three
different cases of w¼0 (i.e. ignored self-weight, the result is
identical with that generated by SAP2000), w¼0.01 N/mm, and
w¼0.05 N/mm. It can be observed that the uniformly distributed
load has significant influence on the dynamic response of cable. The
elastic and inelastic responses of cable subjected to El Centro
earthquake are shown in Fig. 13. Since the proposed element
considers the self-weight and inelastic effects of cable, it is proved
to be more efficient than the cable element provided by SAP2000.
Example 6. A plane cable net subjected to both static and
dynamic loadings is shown in Fig. 14. The static behavior of this
structure was presented by Jayaraman and Knudson [11]. In this
research, both static and dynamic analyses are performed.
The lumped mass at each node is assumed to be 8.76 Ns2/mm
(50 lbs2/in). Additional data of the problem are given in Table 8. The
static load is applied first to the structure by a static analysis, and
then the earthquake loading is applied in the vertical direction of
the structure by a nonlinear time–history analysis. The vertical
displacements of cable net under static load are compared in
Table 9. It can be seen that a strong agreement of displacements of
study cable net predicted by proposed program, SAP2000, and
Jayaraman and Knudson [11] is obtained. The displacement
responses of cable net under dynamic load are shown in Fig. 15.
It can be seen that all the results generated by proposed program
and SAP2000 are nearly the same, which prove the accuracy of the

5
x
4 15
y 3 14
26
z 13 25 E = 200 GPa
2 37

3m
12 24 36 48
1 23 35 59 704781 σy = 220 MPa
11 46 58
34 69 80 91 M
22 57 90 A = 100 mm2
10 45 68 79
33
21
56 89 .0m
44 67 78 50

3m
32 55 = Ground motion M = 1.0 Ns2/mm
66 88 .0
8x5 43 77 x5
.0 = 54 10
40.
0m 65 76 87 Lu = 4995 mm
4m 4m

Fig. 10. Inclined cable subjected to earthquake.

Fig. 9. Saddle net.

Table 6
Comparison of displacements (mm) of saddle net.

Node z-coord. Kwan [21] Present

dx dy dz dx dy dz

1  1368
2  2432
3  3192
4  3648
5  3800
11  1032 15.55  4.46 81.70 15.55(0.00)c  4.46(0.00) 81.66(0.05)
12  1835 11.50  5.55 61.22 11.5(0.00)  5.54(0.18) 61.18(0.07)
13  2408 7.38  4.20 33.31 7.38(0.00)  4.19(0.24) 33.28(0.09)
14  2752 5.34  3.11 17.88 5.34(0.00)  3.11(0.00) 17.87(0.06)
15  2867 4.11  2.80 11.16 4.10(0.24)  2.80(0.00) 11.15(0.09)
22  792 14.43  3.53 97.14 14.42(0.07)  3.53(0.00) 97.10(0.04)
23  1408 11.27  4.47 72.90 11.26(0.09)  4.46(0.22) 72.84(0.08)
24  1848 7.25  2.97 31.98 7.25(0.00)  2.97(0.00) 31.94(0.13)
25  2118 5.67  2.12 10.54 5.67(0.00)  2.11(0.47) 10.52(0.19)
26  2200 4.77  0.60  11.34 4.77(0.00)  0.60(0.00)  11.34(0.00)
33  648 11.71  1.71 92.44 11.70(0.09)  1.71(0.00) 92.40(0.04)
34  1152 9.55  2.11 66.94 9.54(0.10)  2.11(0.00) 66.89(0.07)
35  1512 6.30  1.15 20.21 6.30(0.00)  1.15(0.00) 20.17(0.20)
36  1728 4.92  0.23  14.05 4.91(0.20)  0.23(0.00)  14.06(  0.07)
37  1800 4.65 0.52  35.79 4.65(0.00) 0.52(0.00)  35.77(0.06)
44  600 10.63 0 88.73 10.62(0.09) 0 88.68(0.06)
45  1067 8.80 0 62.83 8.79(0.11) 0 62.77(0.10)
46  1400 5.83 0 13.99 5.83(0.00) 0 13.95(0.29)
47  1600 4.64 0  22.52 4.63(0.22) 0  22.52(0.00)
48  1667 4.55 0  45.89 4.54(0.22) 0  45.87(0.04)
52  600  0.92 0 5.86  0.92(0.00) 0 5.86(0.00)
72  1848 3.85  0.78  30.12 3.85(0.00)  0.78(0.00)  30.10(0.07)
81  2867 4.11 2.80 11.16 4.10(0.24) 2.80(0.00) 11.15(0.09)
85  1032  5.40 1.87 32.17  5.40(0.00) 1.87(0.00) 32.15(0.06)

c
Numbers in parentheses are the percentage error with respect to Kwan [21] values.
244 H.-T. Thai, S.-E. Kim / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 47 (2011) 237–246

80 60
Present
60 Present
Horizonal displacement (mm)

Horizonal displacement (mm)

SAP2000 40
SAP2000
40
20
20

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
-20
-20
-40
-40
-60

-80 Time (s) -60

Time (s)

Fig. 11. Displacement responses of inclined cable. (a) El Centro earthquake and (b) Loma Prieta earthquake.

Table 7
Comparison of displacement response of the inclined cable in elastic analysis.

Earthquake type Max/min Displacement(mm) SAP2000 Present Error (%)

El Centro Max Horizontal 66.932 66.884 0.07

Vertical 77.038 77.076 0.05
Min Horizontal  57.832  57.730 0.18
Vertical  89.102  89.093 0.01
Loma Prieta Max Horizontal 52.913 52.999 0.16
Vertical 70.742 70.717 0.03
Min Horizontal  53.014  52.888 0.24
Vertical  71.030  70.912 0.17

Present, w = 0
80
Present, w = 0.01N/mm
Present, w = 0.05N/mm
60
Horizonal displacement (mm)

40

20

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-20

-40

-60

-80
Time (s)

Fig. 12. Effect of distributed loading on response of inclined cable under El Centro.

proposed program in predicting the seismic response of cable 6. Conclusion

structure. Using the same personal computer configuration (AMD
Phenom II, 3.2 GHz) the analysis time of the proposed program and An accurate and effective catenary cable element is presented for
SAP2000 of the plane cable net subjected to Loma Prieta earth- the nonlinear analysis of cable structures subjected to static and
quake, which is the problem having the longest analysis time, are dynamic loadings. The explicit form of tangent stiffness matrix and
5 s and 708 s, respectively. This result demonstrates the high corresponding internal force vector are presented. With the present
computational efficiency of the proposed program. element, each cable member in cable nets can be modeled by using
 H.-T. Thai, S.-E. Kim / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 47 (2011) 237–246 245

80

60 Elastic
Inelastic

Horizonal displacement (mm)

40

20

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-20

-40

-60

Time (s)
-80

Fig. 13. Effect of material nonlinearity on response of inclined cable under El Centro.

6
2 900
10 Present (inelastic)
P Present (elastic)
Vertical displacement (mm)

1 SAP2000
f P
m 700
P 5 f 12 .48
30
f P 9 m
30.48 3 4 f 11 .48 500
m 30
30.48 7 8 m
m
.48
30.48
m 30
300
f = 9.144 m

Fig. 14. Plane cable net. 100

0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Table 8
Time (s)
Initial properties of plane cable.

Item Data
700
Cross-sectional area 146.45 mm2
Vertical displacement (mm)

Elastic modulus 82,737 MPa

Yield stress 420 MPa
600
Cable self-weight 1.459 N/m
Prestressed force of horizontal members 24.283 kN
Prestressed force of inclined members 23.687 kN
500
Vertical load at all internal nodes 35.586 kN

400

Table 9
Comparison of displacements of plane cable under static loading. 300 Present (inelastic)
Present (elastic)
Researcher Displacements of node 4 (mm) SAP2000
200
x-direction y-direction z-direction 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Jayaraman and Knudson [11]  39.62  40.20  446.32 Time (s)
SAP2000  40.28  40.28  448.88
Present  40.13  40.13  446.50 Fig. 15. Displacement responses at node 4 of the plane cable: (a) El Centro and (b)
Loma Prieta earthquake.

only one element. The computer program developed for this research
is verified for accuracy and computational efficiency through several
numerical examples. The good results obtained in a short analysis Acknowledgement
time prove that the proposed element can be effectively used in
predicting the nonlinear behavior of cable structures instead of using This research has been supported by the Brain Korea 21 Project
the time-consuming commercial structural software. of the Korea Research Foundation.
246 H.-T. Thai, S.-E. Kim / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 47 (2011) 237–246
References
[1] J. Argyris, D. Scharpf, Large deflection analysis of prestressed networks, Journal
of the Structural Division 98 (3) (1972) 633–654.
[2] M. Gambhir, B. Batchelor, Finite element study of the free vibration of a 3-D
cable networks, International Journal of Solids and Structures 15 (2) (1979)
127–136.
[3] H. Ozdemir, A finite element approach for cable problems, International Journal
of Solids and Structures 15 (5) (1979) 427–437.
[4] H. Ernst, Der E-modul von seilen unter beruecksichtigung des durchhanges,
Der Bauingenieur 40 (2) (1965) 52–55.
[5] J. Liew, N. Punniyakotty, N. Shanmugam, Limit-state analysis and design of
cable-tensioned structures, International Journal of Space Structures 16 (2)
(2001) 95–110.
[6] J. Coyette, P. Guisset, Cable network analysis by a nonlinear programming
technique, Engineering Structures 10 (1) (1988) 41–46.
[7] H. Ali, A. Abdel-Ghaffar, Modeling the nonlinear seismic behavior of cable-
stayed bridges with passive control bearings, Computers and Structures 54 (3)
(1995) 461–492.
[8] Z.H. Chen, Y.J. Wu, Y. Yin, C. Shan, Formulation and application of multi-node
sliding cable element for the analysis of Suspen-Dome structures, Finite
Elements in Analysis and Design 46 (9) (2010) 743–750.
[9] M. Gambhir, B. Batchelor, A finite element for 3-D prestressed cablenets,
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 11 (11) (1977)
1699–1718.
[10] W. O’Brien, A. Francis, Cable movements under two-dimensional loads, Journal
of the Structural Division, ASCE 90 (3) (1964) 89–123.
[11] H. Jayaraman, W. Knudson, A curved element for the analysis of cable
structures, Computers and Structures 14 (3-4) (1981) 325–333.
[12] C. Wang, R. Wang, S. Dong, R. Qian, A new catenary cable element, International
Journal of Space Structures 18 (4) (2003) 269–275.
[13] A. Andreu, L. Gil, P. Roca, A new deformable catenary element for the analysis of
cable net structures, Computers and Structures 84 (29-30) (2006) 1882–1890.
[14] Y.B. Yang, J.Y. Tsay, Geometric nonlinear analysis of cable structures with
a two-node cable element by generalized displacement control method,
International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics 7 (4) (2007)
571–588.
[15] M. Such, J.R. Jimenez-Octavio, A. Carnicero, O. Lopez-Garcia, An approach based
on the catenary equation to deal with static analysis of three dimensional cable
structures, Engineering Structures 31 (9) (2009) 2162–2170.
[16] J. Michalos, C. Birnstiel, Movements of a cable due to changes in loading,
Journal of Structural Division ASCE 127 (1962) 267–303.
[17] G. Tibert, Numerical analyses of cable roof structures: Royal Institute of
Technology, Dept. of Structural Engineering, 1998.
[18] W. Lewis, M. Jones, K. Rushton, Dynamic relaxation analysis of the non-linear
static response of pretensioned cable roofs, Computers and Structures 18 (6)
(1984) 989–997.
[19] F. Sufian, A. Templeman, On the non-linear analysis of pre-tensioned cable net
structures, Structural Engineering 4 (2) (1992) 147–158.
[20] W. Lewis, The efficiency of numerical methods for the analysis of prestressed
nets and pin-jointed frame structures, Computers and Structures 33 (3) (1989)
791–800.
[21] A. Kwan, A new approach to geometric nonlinearity of cable structures,
Computers and Structures 67 (4) (1998) 243–252.