See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/361093068

Structural design of responsive under-deck cable-stayed footbridges

Article  in  Structures · July 2022

DOI: 10.1016/j.istruc.2022.05.077

CITATIONS READS

0 44

2 authors:

María Del Mar Corral Leonardo Todisco

Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
3 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION    45 PUBLICATIONS   193 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Strut-and-tie modelling View project

APULIABASE: the first database for Architectural Heritage of Apulia Region View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Leonardo Todisco on 05 June 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/structures

Structural design of responsive under-deck cable-stayed footbridges

María del Mar Corral *, Leonardo Todisco
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The use of prestressing through external tendons has been extensively adopted in bridges to optimize the internal
responsive structures stress distribution. The contribution in withstanding permanent and live loads depends on the initial stressing
cable-stayed systems and the relative stiffness between the deck and the tendons. However, these configurations only allow an optimal
adaptive structures
structural behaviour for a specific load distribution. This paper proposes to extend this ideal behaviour for any
adaptability
smart structures
loading condition, using a responsive system which gradually modifies the tension in the cables as the live load
external post-tensioning increases. The responsive system is applied to a footbridge, where the adaptive behavior is materialized through
efficiency a linear actuator located between the deck and the under-deck cable-stayed system.
This study presents analytical and numerical analyses to shed light on the structural design of these systems.
Considering a variable degree of responsiveness, it is possible to quantify the benefits of the responsive system.
Furthermore, several parametric analyses are carried out to identify the optimal solution in terms of material
savings. In addition, it is verified that fatigue in cables, vibrations and the eventual shutdown of the actuator do
not compromise the structural performance of the system.
Results show that a relevant material reduction can be achieved using partially responsive systems. Specif­
ically, the slenderness of the structure can almost be doubled if compared to the same system without any
responsive behaviour.

1. Introduction
1.1. Motivation
The use of prestressing allows to impose a deformation into the
structure, deliberately modifying the internal stress distribution with the
aim to obtain a desired structural response. This simple idea has led one
of the most significant steps in the history of structural engineering [1].
The employment of prestressing allows to equilibrate loads, to introduce
intermediate supports, to decrease spans and to achieve a more efficient
distribution of bending moments [2].
Although there are several ways to classify bridges with prestressed
tendons, the relevant bibliography shows that a common classification is
based on their contribution in withstanding external loads [3–6]. To
express this contribution, the load distribution ratio (β), which repre­
sents the percentage of the vertical load carried by the tendons, is
typically used. While the permanent load distribution ratio (βG ) depends
on the initial stressing, the live load distribution ratio (βQ ) is a function
of the relative stiffness between the deck and the tensioning system.
In external post-tensioned bridges, the tendons usually contribute to
compensate a relevant portion of the permanent load, but they have low
effectiveness for live loads; thus βG is usually very high and βQ is almost
zero. Therefore, external post-tensioning allows to reduce bending mo­
ments at initial loading stages, leading to important savings in terms of
material, especially in structures in which the live-to-dead load ratio is
low.
On the other hand, cable-stayed bridges are designed so the cables
also withstand a portion of the live load. In this case, βG is close to 100%,
while βQ ranges from 50 to 100% [4]. This allows designing extremely
slender decks, in which the main span-to-depth ratio is around 250. In
return, the stays are to be designed to avoid fatigue, implying a signif­
icant cost increment both in the stays and in the anchorages. Extradosed
bridges appear as an intermediate situation between externally post-
tensioned and cable-stayed bridges (βG = 40 − 80 and βQ = 10 − 50
[4]). This load distribution permits the design of more slender decks
compared to the former and stays with a lower cross section than the
latter. Fig. 1.
As shown, the aid of external cables in withstanding the loads allows
to reduce significantly the material employed in the deck. However, this
reduction is limited due to the changing nature of the live loads. Thus,

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mar.corral.domenge@alumnos.upm.es (M.M. Corral).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2022.05.077
Received 25 October 2021; Received in revised form 22 April 2022; Accepted 23 May 2022
Available online 4 June 2022
2352-0124/© 2022 Institution of Structural Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.M. Corral and L. Todisco
Fig. 1. a) Osormort Viaduct [7], an example of external post-tensioned bridge.
b) Carlos Fernandez Casado Bridge over the Barrios de Luna reservoir [7], an
example of cable-stayed bridge. c) Andalucia Bridge over the Guadalquivir
River [7], an example of extradosed bridge.
for different live load configurations, the effectiveness of the system
decreases, reducing the benefits of these structural typologies.
This paper studies the possibility of extrapolating the advantages of
external tendons for different values of the acting live load. This can be
achieved by deliberately modifying the tensioning system as the live
load changes, redistributing the internal forces in the structure. By using
a responsive system, which is gradually tensioned as the live load in­
creases, it is possible to modify bending moments and deflections to
obtain a desired structural behaviour, favoring an overall reduction of
material. Preliminary studies [8] have already shown favorable results,
revealing important material savings compared to its passive analogue.
1.2. Background on responsive structures
The words responsive, adaptive or smart are some of the different
terms used to refer to structures that have one or several elements that
can modify their geometrical configuration to improve a particular
aspect. The movement is triggered by changes in the external conditions,
which are monitored through sensors.
Although there are many examples of responsive systems, most of
them are aimed at improving the functionality of the structure. On the
contrary, this research focuses on responsive systems based on an
enhancement of the structural behaviour.
A literature review on responsive structures with structural purpose
reveals a big variety in terms of structural typology. Fig. 2 represents
some of the most representative case studies.
The adaptability has been applied to concrete structures [9], FRP
beams [10], beam string structures [11], tensegrity structures [12,13],
arches [14], shells [15,16], stress ribbon footbridges [17,18] and trusses
[19,20], to name some examples. A great diversity of materials and
technological components (sensors and actuators) is used. Although
lineal or rotatory actuators are used in most applications, shape memory
alloys [21,22] are also employed as valid alternatives.
Although these examples have been largely theoretically investi­
gated, they have only been applied to prototypes with experimental
purposes. The sole significant contribution of a responsive structure in a
real application has been done by the company BERD, integrating the
Organic Prestressing System (OPS) [23,24] in moveable scaffolding
systems.
Based on the same philosophy, the idea presented in this paper aims
to enhance the structural benefits of external tendons for different values
of the acting live load throughout the whole service life of the structure.
1.3. Research significance and structure of the paper
This paper presents a comprehensive study on responsive under-deck
cable-stayed footbridges. These structures adapt their geometrical
configuration as the loading changes to enhance their structural effi­
ciency. In this study, the responsive behaviour is materialized by placing
a linear actuator between the main structure and the under-deck cable-
stayed system.
The design of these adaptable structures substantially differs from
the conventional approach, as the structural scheme changes over time.
Therefore, this research illustrates the main working principles that
1502
Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514
govern their structural behaviour and it proposes different design
workflows to fulfill both ultimate and serviceability limit states.
The behaviour of these structures is analyzed through an analytical
and numerical approach. The main parameters that affect the final
configuration are evaluated. Specifically, the degree of responsiveness is
identified as a key aspect to determine the main dimensions of the
system.
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 describes the working
procedure of a partially responsive system and defines the design
methodology. Next, Sections 3 and 4 are addressed, respectively, to
study the structure through an analytical and numerical approach.
Various parametric analyses are carried out to identify the key design
parameters. Finally, conclusions and future work are discussed. The
analysis of technological aspects such as control and monitoring stra­
tegies, although essential for the correct functioning of responsive
structures, are out of the scope of this paper.
2. Working principles
2.1. Introduction
This study focuses on the under-deck cable-stayed footbridge rep­
resented in Fig. 3. A strut is located at midspan to materialize the
connection between both elements. The strut is articulated at both ends
and equipped with a linear actuator. The actuator elongates as the live
load acts, thus the contribution of the tendons in withstanding the live
load is very high; for this reason it has been classified as a responsive
cable-stayed system.
The system includes a sensor in charge of reading the movements and
a control system that provides instructions to the actuator, which moves
to the desired position.
Geometrically, the system is defined by a total span (L), a rise (f) and
the angle formed between the deck and the stay (α). Although in the
initial design only one cable is considered, two parallel cables can be
installed to provide the system with sufficient structural redundancy.
2.2. Working procedure of a partially responsive system
The system in Fig. 3 is designed as ”partially” responsive because the
actuator only starts working if a specific value of the live load, defined as
the live load threshold (qt ), is exceeded. Once qt is reached, the actuator
elongates in a measure such as to avoid any additional vertical de­
flections in the deck at midspan. The working procedure can be sum­
marized as follows:
• If the acting live load q is lower than qt (q < qt ), the system works as
a standard under-deck cable-stayed system and the actuator does not
move.
• If the acting live load q exceeds qt (q⩾qt ), the former is resisted by
two different load-bearing systems: the standard cable-stayed system
(i.e., without the actuator) that carries a load equal to qt , and the
responsive system, which carries the additional load qa = q − qt .
This working procedure is graphically illustrated in Fig. 4 for a live load
threshold qt equal to 3kN/m2 . In the image, load increments of 1kN/m2
are applied sequentially, until the design live load (qd = 5kN/m2 ) is
reached. For values of the live load higher than qt , any additional de­
flections at midspan are inhibited: as shown in Fig. 4, the distance of the
beam to the reference line is kept constant.
In the following sections, a partially responsive system is analyzed.
The efficiency of the responsive behaviour is studied by varying the
parameter qt /qd , defined as degree of responsiveness. This allows to study
different situations, ranging from a standard under-deck cable-stayed
system (qt /qd = 1), from now on referred to as passive structure, to a fully
responsive system, in which the actuator works for any value of the
M.M. Corral and L. Todisco
Fig. 2. State of the art of responsive structures.
acting live loads (qt /qd = 0). Several intermediate situations are
considered for different values of qt /qd , to study the effectiveness of a
partially responsive system.
It is noted that, although the term passive is generally used to refer to
a not prestressed reinforcement, in this paper it is used to indicate that
the actuator is not working.
1503
Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514
2.3. Design methodology
2.3.1. Design criteria
The structure is designed according to the Eurocodes [25–27],
applying the values established by the Spanish National Annexes, when
necessary. The applicable limit states in the beam and the stay are Ul­
timate Limit State (ULS), Serviceability Limit State (SLS) and Accidental
Limit State (ALS).
The permanent loads considered in the structural analysis are the
M.M. Corral and L. Todisco Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514

Fig. 3. Scheme of the studied responsive under-deck cable-stayed structure.

Fig. 4. Working procedure of the partially responsive system. Example for a live load threshold qt = 3kN/m2 .

1504
M.M. Corral and L. Todisco
self-weight of the beam and the superimposed dead load (estimated as
4kN/m2 ). These loads are considered uniformly distributed along the
deck. When designing with the analytical formulation, the self-weight of
the beam is always assumed equal to 1kN/m2 . In the numerical analysis,
the actual self-weight is considered.
Regarding the variable loads, only the pedestrian live load is taken
into account, with a value of 5kN/m2 , according to Part 2 of Eurocode 1
[26]. When the design is done through the numerical simulation (Sec­
tion 4), the live load is applied in different positions to obtain the worst
scenario in terms of deflections and bending moments. In the analytical
formulation (Section 3), only a uniform live load distributed along the
whole beam is analysed, as the formulation has only been derived for
this specific load condition.
The under-deck stay has been designed according to Part 1–11 of
Eurocode 3 [27]: FULS ⩽Fuk /1.5 and FSLS ⩽0.45⋅Fuk . FULS and FSLS are,
respectively, the design values of the axial forces at ULS and SLS and Fuk
is the characteristic value of the breaking strength, defined as Fuk =
A′ ⋅fuk , where fuk is the Guaranteed Ultimate Tensile Strength (GUTS),
taken as 1570 MPa, and A′ the cross-sectional area of the stay.
The verification at ULS guarantees that the cable stress does not
reach the yield point, yet this verification is generally less restrictive
than the check at SLS. The limitation of SLS in the stays is an indirect
way of ensuring the fulfillment of the fatigue limit state. Depending on
the typology of the bridge, the tensile stress in the cables is limited to a
different percentage of GUTS (typically, 60% for extradosed and exter­
nally post-tensioned bridges, and 45% for cable-stayed bridges). How­
ever, as the portion of the live load carried by the cables depends on the
relative stiffness between the deck and the tensioning system, some
codes and recommendations [28–30] argue that it is not rational to limit
the allowable stress to a fixed value depending on the typology of the
bridge and propose to limit FSLS to a function of the increment of tensile
stress in the tendons due to live load. The design of the structure pre­
sented in this paper has been done according to the limitation given by
Eurocode 3 [27] for cable-stayed bridges, i.e., for 45% of GUTS.
ULS and SLS are also applicable in the beam, according to Part 1–1 of
Eurocode 3 [27]. As a simplification, no plastic behaviour is considered.
The ULS verification according to the code is σEd ⩽fy /γM0 , being σ Ed the
design stress value of the beam, fy the yield strength of the material and
γ M0 the partial factor for the resistance of the cross-section (γM0 = 1.0,
as recommended in Section 6.1 of Part 1–1 of [27]).
Regarding SLS, a maximum displacement of L/1200 caused by the
frequent live load (Ψ1 ⋅q, being Ψ1 = 0.4 for pedestrian load) is allowed,
as specified in the Spanish Annex of Eurocode 0 [25] for footbridges.
Implicitly, by fulfilling this limitation, the vibration limit state is also
accomplished, avoiding its specific verification. However, due to the
singularity of the structure, this limit state is checked in Section 4.
Additionally, the possible scenario of an interruption of the power
supply must be examined. The linear actuator is instantly self-locked if
there is a power shortage, so the structure would start to work passively.
This is treated as an accidental limit state for which, according to the
code, the structure should be able to resist the permanent load and the
frequent live load (0.4⋅qd ).
2.3.2. Design basis
The reference footbridge of this study has a total span (L) equal to 50
meters and a rise (f) of 5 meters, resulting in a span-to-rise ratio (L/f)
equal to 10, which is a common value in under-deck cable-stayed sys­
tems [3]. The deck cross-section is based on a longitudinal steel beam
with a 25 mm thick square hollow cross-section and a fixed width of 0.8
meters. A total deck width of 4 meters is considered.
For the beam, structural steel S235 (Young’s modulus: Es = 210GPa)
is employed. Fully locked cables are used in the stay. The mechanical
characteristics of these elements depend on the cross-sectional area and
the manufacturer. As a simplification, as recommended by Part 1–11 of
Eurocode 3 [27], the nominal cross-sectional area (A′ ) is taken as the
1505
Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514
multiplication of the surface area (As ′ ) per the fill-factor (f = 0.88, as
proposed by the same code for fully locked cables). In addition, the
mechanical properties are: fu = 1570MPa and Es ′ = 160GPa. Sag effects
in the cable are neglected due to its short length.
The height of the beam (h) and the cross-sectional area of the stay
(A′ ) are the variables to be defined in the design. When using the FE
methodology (Section 4), only discrete values are assigned to h and A′ ,
which correspond to manufacturer specifications, whereas in the
analytical formulation (Section 3), those values are obtained mathe­
matically and can be any within a continuous range.
3. Analytical formulation
3.1. Theoretical background
The structural behaviour of a partially responsive system is studied
through three different load conditions, as shown in Fig. 5. A linear
behaviour of the system is considered, as the deflections are assumed to
be small; thus, the superposition principle can be applied, allowing to
study each stage independently.
The first loading stage corresponds to the permanent loads. The
structural behaviour during this initial stage depends on the initial stress
given to the stays, which compensates a fraction (ρ) of the permanent
loads. In all the cases presented in this paper, the system is designed to
completely balance the permanent loads (ρ = 100%) at midspan,
allowing to halve the calculation span for permanent loads and, as a
consequence, to reduce by a fourth the bending moments in the beam if
compared to an equivalent structure without any tensioning system.
This means that the structural behaviour of the beam is equivalent to a
continuous beam with two equal spans, with the strut acting as an in­
termediate fixed support (i.e., the deflection at the midspan is zero). This
behaviour, in terms of bending moments and displacements, is shown on
the top row of Fig. 5.
The second loading stage corresponds to an acting live load lower
than the live load threshold (q < qt ). Here, the system behaves as a
standard (i.e. passive) under-deck cable-stayed system without any
responsive behaviour. The load distribution between the deck and the
cable-stayed system is governed by the relative stiffness between the
beam and the stays. As suggested by Ruiz-Terán [3], this may be
expressed as the efficiency of the cable-stayed system ξ, which is a
specific parameter for under-deck cable-stayed structures, conceptually
equivalent to β, already described in Section 1.1.
This parameter is defined as ξ = (M0 − MI )/M0 , where M0 is the
statically determined bending moment of the beam at midspan consid­
ered simply supported and MI is the bending moment of the structural
system with stays. The structural behaviour of the beam can be resem­
bled to a simply supported beam with a spring support at midspan,
whose stiffness depends on ξ. The second row of Fig. 5 shows that the
bending moment distribution strongly depends on ξ and, consequently,
for most values of ξ the deflection is not zero at midspan. The higher the
value of ξ, the closer the behaviour of the beam to that of a continuous
beam. On the other hand, the lower the value of ξ, the lower is the ef­
ficiency of the cable-stayed system, with the beam bending moment
distribution converging to that of a simply supported beam.
As indicated by Ruiz-Terán [3], for a simply supported beam loaded
with a uniformly distributed load, ξ is obtained as ξ = 5/4⋅1/(1 + 12χ ),
where χ is the relative stiffness of the deck with respect to the cable-
stayed system, and it is defined as χ = χ I + χ I /χ A . χ I is the adimen­
sional parameter that determines the structural behaviour of the system
if the axial deformation of the deck is not considered (χ I =
(Es ⋅I)/(4⋅f 2 ⋅cos3 (α)⋅Es ′ ⋅A′ )) and χ A is the adimensional parameter that
considers the axial deformation of the deck (χ A =
(Es ⋅A)/(cos3 (α)⋅Es ′ ⋅A′ )). However, it is noted that the term χ A is signif­
icantly larger than χ I , thus its influence on the overall stiffness of the
system is small. Es , I and A are, respectively, the Young Modulus, the
M.M. Corral and L. Todisco Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514

Fig. 5. Bending moments and displacements of the beam for different load conditions [8].

inertia and the area of the beam cross-section, while Es ′ and A′ are the
Young Modulus and the nominal cross-sectional area of the cables.
The third loading stage only occurs if q > qt and the system behaves
as a continuous beam only for the portion of the live load for which the
actuator works (qa = q − qt ). The actuator elongates a magnitude
enough to avoid any additional deflections at midspan from those ob­
tained at the end of the second stage.
A partially responsive strategy allows a more efficient redistribution
of bending moments along the beam; considering the sum of all three
load stages, it is possible to equalize the absolute value of the maximum
positive and negative bending moments. Moreover, the overall deflec­
tion is effectively reduced, not only at midspan but along the entire deck.
In contrast, the load carried by the stays increases, so a higher cross-
sectional area is required.
To evaluate the stresses in the different elements of the system, axial
forces and bending moments are obtained. Table 1 compiles the section
forces in the different loading stages, both in the deck and in the cable-
stayed system.
The design stress in the beam (σEd ) is taken as the maximum between
the normal stresses in the beam sections located at x = L/2 and at x =
3L/16, however, the second never governs the design.
The maximum vertical displacement (uz ) is always assumed to be
located at x = 3L/16. It is estimated as a sum of two terms, as shown
next in Eq. 1. The first term is equal to the displacement at midspan
during the second loading stage, which depends on the efficiency of the
cable-stayed system. The second term represents the relative vertical
displacement between the sections located at x = 3L/16 and at midspan.
In a simplified way, the second term is calculated considering the beam
as continuous for both the second and third loading stages. With this
assumption, the calculated deflection is always higher than the real one,
thus the design is conservative.

Table 1
Summary of section forces in the cable-stayed system and the beam.
Permanent loads Live loads (q)
(g)
q⩽qt Standard cable-stayed behaviour q > qt
(only)
Standard cable-stayed behaviour Responsive behaviour (qa =
(qt ) q − qt )

Strut Reaction [kN] 5 1 1 5

R0 = ⋅L⋅g Rq = ⋅L⋅q⋅ξ Rqt = ⋅L⋅qt ⋅ξ Rqa = ⋅L⋅qa
8 2 2 8
Stay Tension force [kN] 5 L⋅g q⋅L qt ⋅L 5 qa ⋅L
N0 = ⋅ Nq = ⋅ξ Nqt = ⋅ξ Nqa = ⋅
16 sin(α) 4⋅sin(α) 4⋅sin(α) 16 sin(α)
Beam Bending at midspan [kNm] L2 ⋅g 1 1 qa ⋅L2
M L = − M L = ⋅q⋅L2 ⋅(1 − ξ) M L = ⋅qt ⋅L2 ⋅(1 − ξ) M L = −
0, 32 q, 8 qt , 8 qa , 32
2 2 2 2
Bending at x = 3L/16 9⋅L2 ⋅g 3 13 3 13 9⋅qa ⋅L2
M 3L = M 3L = ⋅q⋅L2 ⋅( − ξ) M 3L = ⋅qt ⋅L2 ⋅( − ξ) M 3L =
[kNm] 0, 512 q, 64 8 qt , 64 8 qa , 512
16 16 16 16

1506
M.M. Corral and L. Todisco
5⋅(0.4⋅kt ⋅qt )⋅L4 4 (0.4⋅(kt ⋅qt + ka ⋅qa ))⋅L4
uz(x=3L/16) = ⋅(1 − ⋅ξ) + (1)
384⋅E⋅I 5 2960⋅E⋅I
In Eq. 1, the factors ka and kq have been introduced to take into account
the sequence in which the live load is resisted (see Fig. 4):
• If qt /qd ⩾0.4 : kt = 0.4/(qt /qd ) and ka = 0.
• If qt /qd < 0.4 : kt = 1 and ka = (0.4 − qt /qd )/(1 − qt /qd ).
When the live load threshold is higher than the frequent live load (i.
e., qt /qd ⩾0.40), the maximum displacement is checked before the
actuator has begun to operate. Thus, if only SLS is considered, in all
systems in which qt /qd is between 0.4 and 1, the dimensions of the beam
are identical.
3.2. Design workflow
The aim of this design procedure is to obtain the minimum cross-
sectional area of the stays (A′ ) and the minimum height of the beam
(h), while fulfilling ultimate and serviceability limit states.
Since the design of h and A′ are directly correlated (if the stiffness of
one element is reduced, the other increases), a compromise has to be
reached. The design criterion selected by the authors consists in defining
h and A′ to strictly fulfill the most restrictive limit state (i.e., the material
utilization is equal to 1).
Fig. 6 plots schematically the solutions (pairs of h and A′ ) that strictly
fulfill a specific limit state for the beam or the cable. This graph has been
obtained for one of the cases designed in Section 3.3, since the position
of the curves depends on qt /qd .
The multiple solutions that fulfill all limit states (gray area) are
delimited by two curves, each one corresponding to the most restrictive
limit state in each element. In this specific case of study, SLS criteria
(blue curves) govern the design of both elements. The intersection of
these two curves indicates the point where both limit states are fulfilled
simultaneously. This is the pair of h and A′ used in the design.
It is worth mentioning that the criterion to define the design solution
can be varied to optimize specific targets (e.g. cost, weight, CO2 emis­
sions, etc.). This topic is briefly addressed in the future research section.
As mentioned, the load distribution between both elements depends
on their relative stiffness (χ ). Thus, the design of each element depends
both on h and A′ . In order to calculate the desired solution, an iteration
process is followed (graphically shown in Fig. 7).
To obtain the variables in a simple way, the next methodology is
used: first, initial values of h and A′ , randomly selected and defined as h0
and A′0 , are given. With these values, χ is calculated and it is considered
Fig. 6. Solutions of h and A′ fulfilling a specific limit state.
1507
Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514
Fig. 7. Workflow of the design process using the analytical formulation.
fixed until new values of h and A′ are obtained. In the second step, each
limit state is solved independently. The maximum A′ which fulfills both
conditions, one of them strictly, is taken. The same procedure is followed
for the beam and allows to obtain a value of h. With these two new
values of h and A′ , a new χ is calculated. This process is repeated until the
error (difference of χ between two consequent iterations) is sufficiently
small (specifically, less than 0.00001). This procedure results in values
of h and A′ which strictly fulfill two limit states (as marked in Fig. 6). The
methodology herein described has been implemented using Python
language.
To understand the influence of the responsive system on the overall
behaviour of the structure, different structures, each with a different
value of qt /qd , are designed. The resulting designs allow to analyse the
influence of the responsive system. A wide range of partially responsive
under-deck cable-stayed structures, from fully responsive (i.e., qt /qd =
0.0) to standard structures (qt /qd = 1.0) is covered. Specifically, 21
values of qt /qd from 0.00 to 1.00, with a difference of 0.05 between
them, are considered. The results are presented in the next section.
3.3. Results of the analytical formulation
In all the plots, the x-axis represents the degree of responsiveness
(qt /qd ), which varies from 0 to 1. Figs. 8a and 8b plot, respectively, the
slenderness (L/h) and nominal cross-sectional area of the cable-stayed
system (A′ ) versus qt /qd .
In Fig. 8a, three different tendencies can be observed. First, from qt /
qd = 0.00 to qt /qd = 0.15, ULS governs the design (orange dot marker),
whereas in the rest, SLS is the most restrictive limit state (blue x-
marker). The maximum slenderness (L/h = 57), at qt /qd = 0.15, is
coincident with the change of the governing limit state. From this
maximum to qt /qd = 0.40 there is an abrupt decrease of the slenderness.
This tendency disappears when the live load threshold (qt ) is higher than
the frequent live load (0.4⋅qd ) (i.e., qt /qd ⩾0.40), as the maximum
deflection is checked when the structure still has a passive behaviour,
thus all structures within this zone are designed for the same load case
scenario.
Overall, the comparison of the maximum value of L/h (57) with the
M.M. Corral and L. Todisco
Fig. 8. a) Slenderness (L/h) of the beam [-] vs. degree of responsiveness (qt /qd ) and b) nominal cross-sectional area (A′ ) of the stay system [cm2 ] vs. degree of
responsiveness (qt /qd ).
passive structure (L/h ≃ 27) proves the great saving of material that can
be achieved in the deck using a responsive system.
Fig. 8b plots the cross-sectional area of the stay (A′ ) versus qt /qd . SLS
is always the governing limit state. When qt /qd = 0.0, the strut behaves
as a fixed support, transferring all the live load to the stay system, so the
maximum area is required. As qt /qd increases, the contribution of the
cable in bearing the live load is lower and, therefore, a smaller area is
necessary. The trend line shows a quasi-linear decrease with a slight
change of slope in qt /qd = 0.15 and in qt /qd = 0.40, coincident with the
change of the tendency described in the slenderness’ plot. This proves
that the design of the beam and the stays are strictly correlated, as
expressed by the parameter ξ (Section 3.1).
In Fig. 9, the beam has been designed to fulfill each limit state
independently. Each polyline plotted in Fig. 9 shows the minimum
slenderness required to fulfill only one limit state. In addition, the en­
velope is marked. The following conclusions can be outlined:
• SLS governing the design: as qt /qd increases, the deflections in the
beam increase, thus the resulting slenderness is lower. As the
maximum deflection is calculated for the frequent live load, the
slenderness between qt /qd = 0.4 and qt /qd = 1.0 does not change.
• ULS governing the design: for qt /qd = 0.0 the beam behaves as a two-
span continuous beam for all loads. In this situation, the negative
bending moment at midspan is maximum. As qt /qd increases, the
portion of q which is resisted actively reduces. This allows for a
Fig. 9. Slenderness (L/h) for each limit state individually vs. degree of
responsiveness (qt /qd ).
1508
Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514
redistribution of the bending moments along the beam: positive
bending moments increase and the negatives decrease. This behav­
iour continues until a peak is reached, where the maximum positive
bending moment is equal to the maximum negative one (qt /qd =
0.70), thus the slenderness is the highest possible (L/h ≃ 80). From
there, the maximum positive bending moment increases until it
reaches its maximum at qt /qd = 1.0.
Fig. 10 compares the tensile stress in the cable-stayed system when
only permanent loads (σ ′g ) act, and at SLS (σ ′SLS ). The tensile stress at SLS
is constant (0.45⋅fuk = 706.5MPa) because the stays are designed to
strictly fulfill this limit value at SLS. For permanent loads, the tensile
force in the cable-stayed system is identical in all cases, as the dead
weight has been assumed constant. Consequently, for a lower cross-
sectional area of the stay (A′ ), the tensile stress under permanent loads
(σg ′ ) is higher.
For a specific value of qt /qd , the difference between σ ′SLS and σ′g is the
stress variation in the cable due to the live load. As qt /qd grows, the
contribution of the stays in bearing the live load decreases, as well as the
difference between both curves.
These results show that, due to the singularity of this system, the
limitation of FSLS established by the code (Section 2.3.1) does not
automatically guarantee a reduced live load stress increment, hence a
specific fatigue verification has to be performed (Section 4.5).
In summary, more responsive systems enable to design more slender
beams and the governing limit state depends on the degree of
Fig. 10. Tensile stress (σ ′g and σ ′SLS ) [MPa] in the cable-stayed system vs. degree
of responsiveness (qt /qd ).
M.M. Corral and L. Todisco
responsiveness. Oppositely, the cable-stayed system requires a higher
cross-sectional area as the actuator compensates a higher portion of the
live load.
Based on these results, the next section presents a parametric anal­
ysis addressed to investigate the role of the main parameters in the
design.
3.4. Parametric analysis
3.4.1. Live-to-dead load ratio
The aim of this first parametric analysis is to determine how the
effectiveness of a responsive system varies for different live-to-dead load
ratios (q/g). Six different configurations, in which q/g gradually de­
Fig. 11. Slenderness (L/h) vs. degree of responsiveness (qt /qd ) for different values of q/g.
1509
Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514
creases from q/g = 3.0 (lightest solution) to q/g = 0.5 (heaviest solu­
tion), are designed. In all cases, the live load is kept constant to a value of
q = 5kN/m2 , which corresponds to the design live load for footbridges
[26]. The results shown in the previous Section 3.3 were obtained for q/
g = 1.0.
As q is constant and g varies, the sum (g + q) also varies. Therefore,
the results for different values of q/g can be compared only in a relative
way.
The design of the cable-stayed system (A′ ) does not provide inter­
esting results in this parametric analysis, because, regardless if SLS or
ULS governs the design, as g increases, A′ grows linearly.
In Fig. 11, the slenderness of the beam (L/h) is plotted versus qt /qd
for different values of q/g. In each graph, each line represents the
M.M. Corral and L. Todisco
minimum slenderness obtained when in the design only one limit state is
considered. The envelope is obtained as the most restrictive of the two.
When SLS is governing, the design only depends on q and, since it is
constant in all cases, the SLS curves are almost identical. Slight differ­
ences are due to small changes in the cross-sectional area of the cables
(A′ ). When ULS governs the design of the beam, as it depends on g + q, it
is more restrictive as q/g decreases.
Therefore, as the q/g ratio reduces, the value of qt /qd at which the
maximum slenderness is obtained increases. While in q/g = 3.0 the
maximum slenderness (L/h ≃ 81) is obtained for qt /qd = 0.05, for q/g =
0.5 the peak (L/h ≃ 42) corresponds to qt /qd = 0.30. The lighter the
structure, the less restrictive ULS will be, leading to a more slender
structure.
As a main conclusion, responsive structures are most effective when
live loads are significantly high in comparison to permanent loads.
Therefore, if light materials, such as steel or fiber-reinforced polymer,
are used for the deck, the benefits of this system can be maximized.
3.4.2. Rise-to-span ratio
The second parametric analysis aims to establish the influence of the
rise (f) when designing under-deck cable-stayed structures. The span of
the beam is kept constant (L = 50 m) and the strut length varies,
covering a range from f = 0.01 m (f/L = 0) to f = 50 m (f/L = 1).
These limits are not realistic, but provide a better insight of the re­
percussions of varying the rise-to-span ratio (f/L).
The results obtained from this parametric analysis are plotted in
Fig. 12. In both graphs, f/L is represented in the x-axis and 6 different
lines, for different values of qt /qd , are plotted.
In Fig. 12a, f/L is plotted versus the cross-sectional area of the cable-
stayed system (A′ ). By increasing f/L, the angle (α) formed between the
stays and the beam increases. Consequently, for an unvaried vertical
force transmitted by the strut to the cable, as α increases, the horizontal
component of the axial force in the cable decreases, resulting in a
smaller area of the stay. This behaviour is independent on qt /qd . For a
fixed f/L, as qt /qd increases, the area of the cable-stayed system grows,
which is consistent with the results obtained before.
Fig. 12a shows that it is worth avoiding small values of the rise, as
they would require very high values of A′ . A relevant saving of material
can already be achieved by using a rise-to-span ratio of 0.10. There are
no evident benefits in employing rise-to-span ratios higher than 0.20, as
the savings achieved by reducing the area would be very small compared
to the associated cost of increasing the strut and stay length.
Fig. 12b plots the slenderness versus the span-to-rise ratio. For a
specific value of f/L, the same results as before are obtained: L/h in­
creases with qt /qd , but there are no changes when the live load threshold
is higher than the frequent live load (qt /qd > 0.4). The higher values of
L/h are obtained for qt /qd = 0.20, from where there is a big gap with qt /
qd = 0.40, a result which is consistent with the rapid decrease of
Fig. 12. a) Cross-sectional area of the cable-stayed system (A′ ) [cm2 ] vs. rise-to-span ratio (f /L) and b) slenderness (L/h) [-] vs. rise-to-span ratio (f /L).
1510
Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514
slenderness plotted in Fig. 9. Essentially, this tendency maintains as f/L
varies. For a fixed value of qt /qd , L/h grows rapidly as f/L increases until
f/L ≃ 0.2, from which the increase of slenderness is almost negligible.
This is because as f/L increases (α increases), so does ξ. Hence, even if
the area of the cable-stayed system reduces, as the efficiency of the
tensioning system increases, bending moments in the beam are reduced,
allowing to design more slender beams. This tendency becomes subtle
when qt /qd > 0.4.
In conclusion, the optimal rise-to span ratio, both for the stays and
the beam, is found between 0.10 and 0.20. Whereas in the stays this
behaviour is independent of the degree of responsiveness, the benefits
achieved in the beam for the indicated f/L range are emphasized for low
values of qt /qd .
4. Numerical simulation
4.1. Introduction
The analytical formulation (Section 3) allowed to obtain an overview
on the design of responsive under-deck cable-stayed structures. None­
theless, it is based on a series of simplifications, as described in Section
3.1. Therefore, a more precise numerical analysis is performed to
overcome these limitations.
The under-deck cable-stayed system (Fig. 3) is modeled in Sofistik
(Fig. 13), a FE software for structural analysis. Cross-sections and ma­
terials are described in Section 2.3.2. In order to obtain accurate results,
100 beam elements (and thus 101 nodes) are used to model the deck. For
the stays, cable elements (only tension forces allowed) are employed,
modelled in order to replicate the behaviour of fully-locked cables. The
actuator is modelled as an infinitely stiff beam element in which the
elongation is simulated by introducing a strain in the axial direction. A
linear analysis is performed. The formulation for beam elements used in
Sofistik considers shear deformation and hinge effects.
The numerical approach eliminates the simplifications assumed in
the analytical formulation, providing a more accurate prediction of the
structural behaviour. The control sections are not limited to x = 3L/16
and x = L/2 and the design value of the maximum stress in the beam
(σEd ) is obtained as the maximum Von Mises stress along the whole
Fig. 13. 2-Dimensional numerical model of the responsive system.
M.M. Corral and L. Todisco
beam. Additionally, three different alternatives are considered
regarding the position of the live load.
The introduction of these new load patterns causes a more restrictive
design of the beam. Therefore, although the numerical approach pro­
vides more accurate results, the analytical results are still valid for a
preliminary analysis.
In addition, the accidental limit state in which the actuator stops to
work is also checked; it is verified that the structure can withstand this
situation without compromising the structural safety. Furthermore, the
vibration limit state of the system is verified, as well as the fatigue in the
stays.
4.2. Design workflow
The design procedure is represented in Fig. 14. An iterative process,
using the parametric input language CADINP, is implemented in Sofistik
to obtain, for each value of qt /qd , the minimum dimensions of the beam
and cable-stayed system. Specifically, the height of the beam (h) and the
diameter of the stay (D′ ) are the target variables to be minimized. The
structure is designed to fulfill all applicable limit states in the beam and
the stays.
To simplify the calculations and to provide realistic dimensions, the
value of h is forced to a be multiple of 5 cm and the diameter of the cable
(D′ ) to a multiple of 5 mm. Only fully locked cables with commercial
dimensions are considered. A consequence of restricting the values of h
and D′ is that, in most cases, it is not be possible to strictly fulfill the limit
states. Thus, the criterion to define those dimensions is that the material
utilization of both the beam and the cable-stayed system must be be­
tween 0.9 and 1.0.
4.3. Results of the numerical analysis
In Fig. 15, the results obtained for the dimensions of the beam
(slenderness) are plotted versus qt /qd . A maximum slenderness equal to
L/h = 53 (h = 0.95 m) is accomplished for qt /qd = 0.20 and qt /qd =
0.15. Although the maximum slenderness is lower than the analytically
calculated (L/h ≃ 57), it is reached for the same value of qt /qd ,
providing consistent results. The three tendencies described in Section
3.3 can also be identified in this plot.
The results of the cross-sectional area of the cable-stayed system (A′ )
are not displayed as A′ is constant for most values of qt /qd , due to the
limited number of options available within the necessary range.
Fig. 14. Workflow of the design process using the numerical simulation.
1511
Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514
Fig. 15. Slenderness (L/h) [-] of the beam vs. degree of responsiveness (qt /qd ).
In Fig. 16a, the vertical displacements due to the frequent live load
are plotted versus qt /qd . Two continuous lines are displayed; they
represent the vertical displacement at midspan and the maximum ver­
tical displacement along the beam. The maximum vertical displacement
is generally found at midspan when qt /qd is high, as deflections are
checked before the actuator has begun to move. Fig. 16a also reveals
when SLS is the governing limit state; when qt /qd > 0.35, uz is very close
to the limit, indicating that SLS governs the design.
Fig. 16b shows the maximum Von Mises stresses in the beam at ULS.
As expected, these stresses are close to the limit (235 MPa) when ULS is
governing the design; this demonstrates the high material utilization
achieved in the beam when the degree of responsiveness is high.
For qt /qd = 0.20, the material utilization is also very high, even if
SLS governs the design (i.e., the maximum vertical displacement is close
to L/1200). This proves that, for this specific value of qt /qd , the
responsive system allows to optimize the design of the beam, as both
limit states are almost strictly fulfilled.
Finally, tensile stresses in the cable-stayed system are plotted in
Fig. 17.
Results are similar to Fig. 10, although the tendency is not as clear as
before, due to the limitations imposed by the fixed values of D′ and h.
The tensile stress in the cable-stayed system is plotted for permanent
loads and at SLS. The tensile stress at SLS (σ ′SLS ) is the condition gov­
erning the design of the cables. Depending on the material utilization
achieved in each case, it will be closer to 0.45⋅fuk , which is the condition
set in Section 2.3.1. If the maximum material utilization was achieved
for all cases, σ SLS would be constant for all qt /qd , with a value of 706.5
MPa (0.45⋅fuk ).
4.4. Dynamic behaviour verification
Regardless of whether an analytical or a numerical approach is used,
the responsive under-deck cable-stayed footbridge is considerably
lighter than a passive structure. As a consequence, it can be susceptible
to human-induced vibrations. Therefore, a dynamic analysis, based on
the recommendations given in the HiVoSS Guidelines [31], is per­
formed. This analysis is carried out on the structure designed with qt /
qd = 0.20, as it presents the highest slenderness. The procedure follows
the methodology described in [31]:
1. Evaluation of natural frequencies. They are obtained from a modal
analysis of the Finite Element model of the system. The masses
considered in the analysis are the self-weight of the beam and the
superimposed dead load. The mass of the actuator is neglected. The
M.M. Corral and L. Todisco
Fig. 16. a) Vertical displacement caused by 0.4⋅q vs. degree of responsiveness (qt /qd ) and b) Von Mises stress (σ) [MPa] in ULS in the beam vs. degree of
responsiveness (qt /qd ).
Fig. 17. Tensile stress in the cable-stayed system for permanent loads (σ ′g ) and
at SLS (σ′SLS ) [MPa] vs. degree of responsiveness (qt /qd ).
analysis is performed considering a diagonal, also known as lumped,
mass matrix.
2. Check of the critical range of natural frequencies. The critical ranges
for natural frequencies of footbridges with pedestrian excitation are
1.25 to 4.60 Hz for vertical and longitudinal vibrations, and 0.50 to
1.20 Hz for lateral vibrations [31]. From the eigenvalues obtained
from the Finite Element model, only one is within the critical ranges,
the second vertical vibration mode has a frequency of 2.587 Hz. As
the footbridge is susceptible to vibrate, a more detailed dynamic
analysis is performed. Fig. 18
Fig. 18. First (fs,1 = 0.660 Hz) and second (fs,2 = 2.587 Hz) vertical vibra­
tion modes.
1512
Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514
3. Assessment of the design situation. The dynamic analysis is done
considering a traffic class TC4, that is expected to occur once in the
lifetime of the footbridge. For this traffic class, Table 4–3 of HiVoSS
[31] establishes a pedestrian density of d = 1P/m2 .
4. Evaluation of the maximum acceleration (amax ). To calculate the
maximum acceleration, an harmonic load model is applied to the
structure. A pedestrian stream of n random pedestrians is modelled
as an idealized stream of n’ perfectly synchronised pedestrians.
The harmonic distributed load that represents this equivalent
pedestrian stream is p(t)[N/m2 ] = P⋅cos(2⋅π⋅fs ⋅t)⋅n′ ⋅Ψ [31]. Where fs
is the step frequency, assumed equal to the footbridge natural fre­
quency under consideration (fs = 2.587 Hz), P = 280 N is the
component of the force due to a single pedestrian with a walking step
frequency fs and n′ is the equivalent number of pedestrians on the
loaded surface (S = L⋅b = 200m2 ; being L = 50 m the span of the
footbridge and b = 4 m its width). For the considered Traffic Class, it
√̅̅̅
is calculated as n′ = 1.85⋅ n/S = 0.1308, being n the number of
pedestrians of the loaded surface (n = S⋅d = 200P). Finally, Ψ is a
reduction coefficient that considers the probability that the footfall
frequency approaches the critical range of the natural frequency
under consideration. For fs = 2.587 Hz, the norm establishes a value
of Ψ between 0 and 0.25. A conservative value of Ψ = 0.25 is
considered.
Finally, amax is obtained by applying the harmonic load p(t) to the
FE model. The distribution of p(t) in the structure corresponds to the
modal shape under consideration. A modal steady-state analysis is
performed and a maximum acceleration of amax = 0.57m/s2 is
obtained.
5. Checking of comfort levels. The maximum acceleration, amax =
0.57m/s2 , corresponds to a medium comfort level (CL2). Therefore,
the vibration limit state is verified even for a rarely expected
scenario.
4.5. Fatigue verification
The elongation of the actuator causes an increase of tension in the
stays. If this movement is repeated continuously, the structure can fail
due to fatigue in the stays.
The codes and manufacturers provide a maximum stress increment
that can be tolerated by the cables. These values are applicable for 2⋅106
load cycles, so by fulfilling this restriction the fatigue limit state is
automatically verified. However, higher stress ranges can be assumed if
it is demonstrated that the number of cycles during the whole life of the
structure will be lower. To perform the fatigue check, the cumulative
damage method proposed by Part 1–9 of the EC3 [27] is used according
to the following steps:
M.M. Corral and L. Todisco
1. Obtain the stress history from the loading sequence. Then, calculate
the stress variation (Δσ ) in the stays caused by each value of the
traffic live load.
2. Count the cycle of each stress range. The number of times each load
occurs is calculated using the definition of probability of occurrence
given by the Eurocodes [25]. The number of cycles is taken as the
number of times each load is exceeded.
3. Determine the cycles to failure at each stress range using the Wöhler
curve of the material. Figure 9.1 of Part 1–11 of the EC3 [27] pro­
vides the curve for fully locked cables, with Δσc = 150 MPa
(maximum stress range for 2⋅106 cycles).
4. Proceed to the damage summation using the Palmgren–Miner rule;
∑
ni /Ni = Dd . If Dd ⩽1, the fatigue limit state is verified.
As the pedestrian live load reaches high values very rarely
throughout the service life of the structure, a value of Dd = 0.04 is ob­
tained, amply fulfilling the fatigue limit state in the stays. Again, the
analysis has been carried out on the structure designed with qt /qd =
0.20.
5. Conclusions and future research
The use of external prestressed cables gives the designer the ability to
control the internal force distribution. If this technology is combined
with a responsive system, the design of these structures leads to relevant
material savings.
This paper focuses on the structural behaviour and design method­
ologies of responsive under-deck cable-stayed footbridges. These sys­
tems are dimensioned using an analytical formulation and a numerical
analysis, showing consistent results between both approaches. The ef­
ficiency of the responsive system is evaluated by varying a parameter
defined as degree of responsiveness (qt /qd ), representing the portion of the
live load actively resisted.
Results probe that a relevant material reduction can be achieved
using partially responsive systems. Specifically, optimum results are
found for values of qt /qd around 0.20, meaning that the actuator begins
to work for any acting live load higher than 1kN/m2 . The slenderness of
the beam increases from a value of L/h = 28 (if no active behaviour is
considered), to a maximum of L/h = 53.
However, it is noted that the results have been obtained following a
specific criterion based on maximizing the material utilization of the
beam and the cable-stayed system. However, this solution is not
necessarily the lightest, cheapest or most sustainable. Consequently,
future research should be addressed to evaluate alternative design pro­
cedures to satisfy different optimization targets. These optimization
procedures have been already applied to cable-stayed bridges [32,33],
and may be extended to the responsive system presented in this
research.
The parametric analysis proves that responsive systems are espe­
cially indicated when the live-to-dead load ratio is high, thus in struc­
tures such as footbridges built with light materials. The optimum rise-to-
span ratio is found between 0.10 and 0.20.
Furthermore, it has been verified that the accidental situation of an
actuator shutdown, the vibration limit state, and the fatigue of the cables
do not govern the design of the system, confirming the validity of the
design procedures proposed in this paper.
Although a preliminary analysis [8] confirmed that these results
imply relevant economic savings, future work should evaluate this
aspect in detail, considering material and energetic costs, not only of the
structure but also of the actuator. Additionally, in future research, the
carbon footprint of the proposed responsive system has to be analysed.
This shall be addressed with an optimization problem, as already
mentioned.
To physically evaluate the applicability of the system, a 6-meter-span
prototype is being built. Different control strategies are evaluated to
1513
Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514
determine the optimum behaviour from an energetic, structural, and
user comfort point of view. This prototype will help to understand the
real technological limitations of the instrumentation (e.g., response
time, actuator working speed, service life, etc.). Finally, other aspects
such as maintenance, replacement, and robustness have to be more
deeply analysed to design a reliable structure.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors want to thank Irene Ajona for her contribution in the
research on the state-of-the-art on responsive structures and Carlos
Martín de la Concha for his help in the study of the dynamic behaviour of
the structure.
References
[1] Strasky J. The Power of prestressing. Structural Concrete 2003;4(1):25–42. https://
doi.org/10.1680/stco.4.1.25.38234.
[2] Todisco L, Peiretti HC, Mueller C. Funicularity through External Posttensioning:
Design Philosophy and Computational Tool. Journal of Structural Engineering
2016;142(2):04015141. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0001416.
[3] A.M. Ruiz-Terán, Puentes atirantados no convencionales: comportamiento
estructural y criterios de diseno, Ph.D. thesis, Universidad de Cantabria, Santander
(2005).
[4] Collings D, Gonzalez AS. Extradosed and cable-stayed bridges, exploring the
boundaries, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Bridge Engineering
2013;166(4):231–9. https://doi.org/10.1680/bren.10.00058.
[5] F. Sima, K. Stockhusen, Evolución de los Puentes Atirantados, in: Cable Stayed and
Extradosed Bridges - Conceptual Design and Structural Behaviour, 2014. doi:
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.30761.19045.
[6] Extradosed bridges in Japan, Role of Concrete Bridges in Sustainable Development
- Proceedings of the International Symposium - Celebrating Concrete: People and
Practice (2003) 17–30 doi:10.1680/rocbisd.32484.0002.
[7] Carlos Fernández Casado S.L., (accessed: 07.10.2021). url:https://www.cfcsl.com/
en/.
[8] M. d. M. Corral, L. Todisco, H. Corres, Preliminary study on the design of structures
with a responsive external post-tensioning system, Structural Engineering
International 31 (3) (2021) 368–375. doi:10.1080/10168664.2020.1787806.
[9] Nicklisch A. Adaptively prestressed concrete structures, Master’s thesis.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2000.
[10] T. Noack, J. Ruth, U. Muller, Adaptive hybrid structures, Proceedings of the
international conference on adaptable building structures, AdapTable (2006)
9–256 – 9–260.
[11] Shen Y, Cheng H, Yang P, Luo Y. A static control algorithm for adaptive beam
string structures based on minimal displacement. Mathematical Problems in
Engineering 2013;2013. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/713768.
[12] Kmet S, Urban V, Tomko M, Soltys R. Analisis of an adaptive tensegrity module. In:
IASS Symposium 2019, International Association for Shell and Spatial Structures
(IASS); 2019. p. 121–8.
[13] Adam B, Smith IF. Active tensegrity: A control framework for an adaptive civil-
engineering structure. Computers and Structures 2008;86(23–24):2215–23.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2008.05.006.
[14] van Bommel R, Habraken A, Teuffel P. Adaptive arch: Active stress minimization in
a thin arch structure. Procedia Engineering 2016;155:265–74. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.028.
[15] W. Sobek, A. Weilandt, C. Lemaitre, Topology of Adaptive Lightweight Structures,
IASS-APCS Symposium New Olympics, New Shell and Spatial Structures (2006).
[16] Hunt J, Haase W, Sobek W. Designing Adaptive Spatial Structures. Journal of the
International Association for Shell and Spatial Structures 2008.
[17] W. Sobek, P. Teuffel, Adaptive lightweight structures, in: International IASS
Symposium, 2002.
[18] Bleicher A, Schlaich M, Fujino Y, Schauer T. Model-based design and experimental
validation of active vibration control for a stress ribbon bridge using pneumatic
muscle actuators. Engineering Structures 2011;33(8):2237–47. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.02.035.
[19] Senatore G, Duffour P, Winslow P, Wise C. Shape control and whole-life energy
assessment of an ‘infinitely stiff’ prototype adaptive structure. Smart Materials and
Structures 2017;27(1):015022. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-665x/aa8cb8.
[20] Senatore G, Duffour P, Winslow P. Synthesis of minimum energy adaptive
structures. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 2019;60:849–77. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00158-019-02224-8.
M.M. Corral and L. Todisco
[21] Amarante dos Santos F, Cismasiu C. Adaptive underslung beam using shape-
memory alloys for frequency-tuning. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and
Structures 2016;28(10):1260–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045389X16667558.
[22] Wang Q, Teuffel P. Adaptive structures and design concept of transformable joints.
International Journal of Design and Nature and Ecodynamics 2017;12(2):235–45.
https://doi.org/10.2495/DNE-V12-N2-235-245.
[23] P. Pacheco, Gantry with auto-adjusting prestressing, World Intellectual Property
Organization. WO 2004/109018 A1, 2004.
[24] Pacheco P, Coelho H, Resende A, Carvalho D, Soares I. High productivity in bridge
construction – The OPS effect. In: Multi-Span Large Bridges. Taylor and Francis;
2015. p. 559–66. https://doi.org/10.1201/b18567-72.
[25] European Committee for Standardization, Eurocode 0: Basis of structural design
(2019).
[26] European Committee for Standardization, Eurocode 1: Actions on structures
(2019).
[27] European Committee for Standardization, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures
(2019).
1514
View publication stats
Structures 41 (2022) 1501–1514
[28] Service d’Etudes Techniques des Routes et Autoroutes, Cable stays.
Recommendations of French interministerial commission of prestressing (2002).
[29] IABSE - Working Commission 3, Extradosed Bridges. State-of-the-Art-Report (jan
2014).
[30] Specifications for Design and Construction of Cable-Stayed Bridge and Extradosed
Bridge, Japan Prestressed Concrete Engineering Association. Publication
committee for the English edition of Specifications for Design and Construction of
Cable-Stayed Bridge and Extradosed Bridge, 2011.
[31] European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, M.
Feldmann, C. Heinemeyer, M. Lukić, Human-induced vibration of steel structures
(Hivoss), Publications Office, 2010. doi:doi/10.2777/79056.
[32] Ferreira F, Simóes L. Automated synthesis of controlled cable-stayed footbridges
with S-shaped deck. Advances in Engineering Software 2020;149(July):102881.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2020.102881.
[33] Martins AM, Simões LM, Negrão JH. Optimization of extradosed concrete bridges
subjected to seismic action. Computers & Structures 2021;245:106460. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2020.106460. url:https://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/pii/S0045794920302637.