Test and Analysis of Postfire Fatigue Performance

of Steel Wires and Cables

Zhaolei Zhang1; Tong Guo, F.ASCE2; Zhongxiang Liu, Ph.D., M.ASCE3; and Shiyuan Wang4

Abstract: Fire is an accidental, severe hazard for bridges during their lifetime. Hangers in suspension bridges are among the most vul-
nerable components with respect to the hanger fatigue effect, and fatigue performance after fire exposure is vital to bridge safety. Therefore,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southeast University on 10/13/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

a comprehensive assessment of the postfire hanger fatigue property is necessary. In this study, fatigue tests were conducted on steel wires
after various elevated temperatures, and a multiparameter Weibull model was adopted to describe the fatigue data. Based on the fatigue life
distribution of steel wires and the corresponding parallel systems, the hanger fatigue life was evaluated using the Monte Carlo simulation
and order statistics approach, and the S–N curves were obtained. The results demonstrated that the fatigue life of the hanger was signifi-
cantly lower than the mean life of the individual wires, and degraded as the exposure temperature increased. In addition, two small cables
consisting of 19 parallel steel wires were tested for verification, and the results were consistent with those of the analytical model. The
results of this study can be applied to quantify the extent of damage caused by fire and to assess the remaining hanger service life.
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001938. © 2022 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Author keywords: Hanger; Steel wire; Fatigue; Parallel system; Postfire performance.

Introduction
Cable-supported bridges play a vital role in the traffic network grid,
and their safety has been a significant concern (Gong and Agrawal
2016). In recent years, owing to the increase in traffic volume and
hazardous material transport, bridges have occasionally suffered
from fires (Quiel et al. 2015), primarily caused by vehicular acci-
dents (Garlock et al. 2012). For example, on March 4, 2017, a se-
vere vehicle collision occurred on the Runyang suspension bridge
(RSB) and caused a large fire that lasted for over an hour. The RSB
is one of the major connections between Zhenjiang and Yangzhou
crossing the Yangtze River in Jiangsu province, China. It was
opened in 2005 and more than 40,000 vehicles passed through it
every day. Vehicles involved in the accident were thoroughly
burned, although no casualties were reported. After the accident,
an on-site inspection was immediately conducted. Four hangers
near the fire source were severely damaged, however, no broken
hanger wires were observed, as shown in Fig. 1.
Hangers are key load-carrying elements in suspension bridges
that connect the girder to the main cable (Jiang et al. 2009; Liu
et al. 2019). Although the hangers mentioned previously did not
fail after the fire, the observed damage poses a serious threat to
safety. Previous studies have revealed that high-strength steel ex-
hibits deteriorated mechanical properties (such as strength and
1
Ph.D. Candidate, School of Civil Engineering, Southeast Univ.,
Nanjing 210096, P.R. China. Email: zhaolei.zhang@seu.edu.cn
2
Professor, Key Laboratory of Concrete and Prestressed Concrete
Structures of the Ministry of Education, Southeast Univ., Nanjing
210096, P.R. China (corresponding author). Email: guotong@seu.edu.cn
3
Dept. of Bridge Engineering, School of Transportation, Southeast
Univ., Nanjing 210096, P.R. China. Email: zhongxiang@seu.edu.cn
4
Postdoctoral Researcher, School of Civil Engineering, Southeast
Univ., Nanjing 210096, P.R. China. Email: shiyuan_wang@seu.edu.cn
Note. This manuscript was submitted on February 15, 2022; approved
on June 6, 2022; published online on August 4, 2022. Discussion period
open until January 4, 2023; separate discussions must be submitted for in-
dividual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Bridge Engineering,
© ASCE, ISSN 1084-0702.
ductility) after heating (Lu et al. 2017; Zheng et al. 2006; Tao
2015), and they demonstrated inferior fire resistance owing to
their low specific heat and high thermal conductivity. Conse-
quently, hangers are adversely affected by fires. However, hangers
are also prone to fatigue damage as they are subjected to significant
cyclic fluctuations induced by vehicles and wind (Min Park et al.
2013; Liu et al. 2017; Petrini and Bontempi 2011). In the research
carried out by Zhang et al. (2021), it was found that the mechanical
performance, especially the fatigue life, of the postfire steel wires is
significantly reduced as a result of the change in microstructure.
The most dramatic reduction of the fatigue life was found at expo-
sure temperatures above 500°C. Since the postfire steel cables are
likely to fail prematurely, it is necessary to investigate their fatigue
life quantitatively.
In general, the fatigue properties of a hanger can be obtained via
fatigue tests, according to the specifications of the Ministry of
Transport of China (MTC 2001). In this regard, it is stipulated
that the wire breakage rate in the hanger should not exceed 5%
after 2 × 106 fatigue cycles under a maximum load of 0.35 Pb (Pb
is the nominal breaking load) with a stress range of 150 MPa. How-
ever, for cables consisting of a number of parallel steel wires,
owing to the capacity limitation of the test machine, evaluating
the fatigue behavior by testing the full cable cross section is imprac-
tical (Stallings and Frank 1991a).
Another method involves deriving the hanger fatigue life based
on the fatigue life of the constituent steel wires. The Post-
Tensioning Institute PTI (2007) pointed out that the relationship
between the fatigue strength of the cable and steel wire can be ex-
pressed as ΔScable = ΔSwire − c, where the value of c is 100 MPa.
Birkenmaier and Narayanan (1982) conducted fatigue tests on
eight cables, each consisting of 19 steel wires, and based on the
test results and the S–N curve of the steel wire, it was proposed
to adopt the number of cycles at which 5% of the total wires
break as the fatigue life of the cable, and c = 140 MPa. Neverthe-
less, these cursory methods are conservative and not sufficiently
precise.
Although the occurrence possibility of bridge fire is low, it can
lead to fatal consequence, or even the collapse of the bridges

© ASCE 04022096-1 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2022, 27(10): 04022096

 Fig. 2. Configuration of a hanger with parallel steel wires.

Table 1. Chemical contents of LG-SW (by weight, %)

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southeast University on 10/13/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 1. Hangers after fire.

Element C Mn Si S P Cu
Ratio 0.75–0.85 0.6–0.9 0.12–0.32 <0.025 <0.025 <0.200
(Kodur et al. 2010). The current bridge standards have not consid-
ered how to deal with the postfire hangers. Besides, researches on
the performance of the postfire hangers are insufficient, which
mainly focus on the static strength of the material. However, the fa-
tigue properties and associated reliabilities of the bridge after the
fire have not been thoroughly studied. To guarantee the safety
and durability of bridges, it is both urgent and important to inves-
tigate the fatigue behavior of fire-exposed hangers to evaluate their
remaining service life. In this study, extensive fatigue tests were
conducted on steel wires at four different stress amplitudes after
they were cooled from various temperatures. The number of cycles
to failure was obtained and described using a multiparameter Wei-
bull distribution. On the basis of the previous tests and parallel sys-
tems, two methods were proposed to evaluate the fatigue life of
hangers after fire, and the results agree with each other. Finally,
two small cables, each consisting of 19 parallel wires, were tested
to verify the accuracy of the proposed model. The outcomes of this
study can assist engineers to evaluate the residual life of postfire
hanger and develop strategies for retrofitting.

Fatigue Life of Individual Steel Wires

High-strength steel wires are fundamental hanger components. For

example, each hanger of the Runyang suspension bridge consists of
109 low-relaxation hot-dip galvanized parallel steel wires (Grade
1670) and is protected by a high-density polyethylene (HDPE)
sheath (Fig. 2).
Test Materials and Specimens
All specimens used in the tests performed in this study were iden-
tical to those used in the Runyang suspension bridge, manufactured
by Fasten. The specimens were 5 mm in diameter and 500 mm in
length. The normal strength was 1,670 MPa and the elastic modu-
lus of the wire was 2.0 × 105 MPa, which conforms to GB/T
17101-2019 (SAC 2019). Table 1 lists the primary chemical com-
position of the wire, which is in accordance with GB/T 24238-2017
(SAC 2017).
Fig. 3. Electric furnace used in this study.
In these tests, each specimen was heated to the target tempera-
ture (200°C–800°C) and maintained at that temperature, and the en-
tire heating process lasted for 60 min. Subsequently, the specimens
were removed from the furnace and cooled to ambient air temper-
ature. Finally, fatigue tests were performed at four different stress
ranges under force control (Table 2), and 15 specimens for each
stress range were tested as a group. According to Chinese specifi-
cation GB/T 17101-2019 (SAC 2019) and previous practice (Li
et al. 2012; Lan 2009), R = Smin/Smax = 0.5 was selected for the
stress ratio. A fatigue rig (Fig. 4) with a capacity of 10 kN was
used to apply a 10 Hz cyclic load. The rig was automatically
stopped when the wire fractured, and the number of cycles to fail-
ure was recorded. The test endpoint was set at 2 million cycles.

Test Equipment and Procedure

The specimens were heated in a temperature-controlled electric fur-
nace, as shown in Fig. 3. A thermocouple was placed inside the cy-
lindrical chamber to measure the temperature. The maximum
temperature in the furnace can reach up to 1,000°C.
Results
The number of cycles to failure under each stress range after the
specimens were heated to various temperatures is listed in Table 3.
According to the test results, it is found that when the specimens

© ASCE 04022096-2 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2022, 27(10): 04022096

 Table 2. Stress ranges of fatigue test (MPa) T17101-2019 (SAC 2019). This indicates that the fatigue property
Stress Maximum Minimum Mean Ratio Ratio
of the steel wire was not significantly affected. As the temperature
No. amplitude stress stress stress 1 2 raised to 500°C, the fatigue life of the specimens started to decrease
significantly. Beyond 700°C, the wire strength decreased by more
1 290 580 290 435 0.29 0.38 than half of its original value (Zhang et al. 2021), and the hangers
2 360 720 360 540 0.36 0.47
immediately fractured under the self-weight of the bridge and traf-
3 430 860 430 645 0.43 0.56
4 500 1,000 500 750 0.50 0.66 fic load. Thereby, only two temperatures, 500°C and 600°C, were
further investigated in this study.
Note: Ratios 1 and 2 denote the ratio between the stress applied and the First, the outliers were checked using the boxplot method before
corresponding strength for specimens cooled from 500°C and 600°C analyzing the fatigue data. As shown in Fig. 5, two outliers, i.e.,
respectively.
142.74 and 22.07, were deleted.
A steel wire can be modeled as a weak-link system, and the fa-
tigue life of the weak-link system is determined by the element with
the lowest fatigue life (Weibull 1951); therefore, the Weibull distri-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southeast University on 10/13/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

bution is used herein. In addition, based on the test data, it is found

that the fatigue life of a wire can be well modeled by a multiparam-
eter Weibull distribution, as shown in Fig. 7. The formula is as fol-
lows (Freudenthal and Gumbel 1953; Canteli 1992; Rackwitz and
Faber 1991; Faber et al. 2003):


α 
ΔS α N m′
FN (N , ΔS) = 1 − exp − (1)
γc K

In the Eq. (1), N is the fatigue life of the steel wire under stress
range ΔS.
γc = (cξA0)−1/α, where c is an unknown parameter; for a wire
with the length of L, ξ = L/L0 (L0 is the length of the sample seg-
ment with the same properties), represents the length effect and
is assumed to be 1 in this study; A0 is a constant that represents
the cross-sectional area of the wire (A0 = 3.14 × 52/4 = 19.625 in
this study).
K = K0 (1 − ms /mZ )γ , where ms and mZ are the mean stress of
the fatigue test and static strength, respectively. In this study, the
stress ratio was 0.5, therefore, ms = 1.5ΔS. It was assumed that
Fig. 4. Fatigue testing machine used in this study. mZ did not vary with the cyclic load, and its values were 1,514
and 1,144 MPa for specimens cooled from 500°C and 600°C, re-
spectively, based on tensile tests. Furthermore, γ is assumed to
Table 3. Fatigue life results obtained after 500°C and 600°C under be 0.5 (Rackwitz and Faber 1991).
different stress ranges (×104) The rest of α, m′ , c, and K0 are unknown parameters. This dis-
tribution was also supported by previous experiments (Castillo
ΔS after 500°C (MPa) ΔS after 600°C (MPa) et al. 1985; Matsukawa et al. 1988). By defining m = α/m′ and
√ 
Test no. 290 360 430 500 290 360 430 500 g(ΔS) = 1 − ms /mz , Eq. (1) can be rewritten as follows:
1 NF 115.95 38.98 17.07 175.00 71.42 27.77 9.22 

α 
ΔS α N m′
2 NF 109.19 40.90 22.07 151.35 60.49 21.52 12.40 FN (N , ΔS) = 1 − exp −
3 NF 93.57 42.42 16.02 182.22 64.43 17.93 9.84 γc K
4 NF 142.74 37.39 12.29 198.80 72.56 17.44 11.16 
m 
5 NF 121.12 36.44 13.25 168.58 43.90 26.52 12.16 c N
6 NF 122.89 32.74 18.55 178.95 52.28 20.36 8.62 = 1 − exp − m A0 (ΔS)α
K0 g(ΔS)
7 NF 84.48 38.95 19.79 188.09 65.56 19.69 8.08
8 NF 99.46 46.04 18.06 167.95 53.85 22.72 10.91

m 
N
9 NF 97.87 36.09 15.25 158.08 61.14 23.17 8.71 = 1 − exp λA0 (ΔS)α (2)
10 NF 103.58 34.76 18.01 193.30 58.90 29.43 10.88
g(ΔS)
11 NF 106.57 31.03 15.51 160.94 77.44 24.31 8.55
12 NF 87.31 44.37 16.82 184.39 71.10 22.59 9.67 where λ = c/K0m ; the unknown parameters become α, m, and λ, and
13 NF 91.91 38.11 15.12 161.72 66.08 24.06 10.41 these parameters can be evaluated from the test results via maxi-
14 NF 112.57 36.04 15.98 171.61 55.62 24.84 7.04 mum likelihood estimation. The probability density function is
15 NF 101.21 39.21 16.22 177.24 68.40 22.77 9.25
dFN (N ; ΔS)
Note: NF indicates that no failure occurred until the cycle limit of 2 × 106. fN (N ; ΔS) =
dN
ΔS is the stress range.
m−1 
m 
α N m α N
= λA0 (ΔS) exp −λA0 (ΔS)
g(ΔS) g(ΔS) g(ΔS)
were heated no higher than 400°C, all of them reached the test end (3)
point of 2 × 106 cycles without fracture under a mean stress range of
571.5 MPa with ±180 MPa amplitude, as required in the code GB/ The log-likelihood function is

© ASCE 04022096-3 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2022, 27(10): 04022096

 (a) (b)

Fig. 5. Boxplot of test results: (a) 500°C; and (b) 600°C.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southeast University on 10/13/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

⎡ ⎤
ln (λ) + ln (A0 ) + α ln (ΔSi ) + (m − 1) ln (Ni ) + ln (m)
n

m
LfN (N ; ΔS) = ⎣ Ni ⎦ (4)
i=1
−m ln (g(ΔSi )) − λA0 (ΔSi )α
g(ΔSi )

Let the partial derivative of (4) be equal to 0; therefore,

⎧ n 
m 
⎪
⎪ ∂LfN (N ; ΔS) 1 α Ni
⎪
⎪ = − A0 (ΔSi ) =0
⎪
⎪ ∂λ λ g(ΔSi )
⎪
⎪ i=1
⎪
⎨ n 
m 
∂LfN (N ; ΔS) Ni
= ln (ΔSi ) − A0 (ΔSi )α ln (ΔSi ) = 0 (5)
⎪
⎪ ∂α g(ΔSi )
⎪
⎪
i=1
⎪ n 
m

⎪
⎪
⎪ ∂LfN (N ; ΔS) 1 Ni Ni
⎪
⎩ = ln (Ni ) + − ln (g(ΔSi )) − A0 (ΔSi )α ln =0
∂m i=1
m g(ΔSi ) g(ΔSi )

The previous equations can be solved using the BFGS algorithm (short for Broyden–Fletcher–Goldfarb–Shanno, a type of quasi-Newton
method). In addition, it is noteworthy that none of the specimens broke prior to the 2 million repeated cycle limit under a stress range
of 290 MPa after they were cooled from 500°C; therefore, the fatigue test data were in censored form. Several methods can be used to
manage censored data in engineering, such as the expectation–maximization (EM) algorithm (Dempster et al. 1977), which is an iterative
approach of maximum likelihood estimation that is widely used to estimate parameters in a probabilistic model when the data are incomplete
(Tian et al. 2011; Lan et al. 2017a). Each EM algorithm iteration includes two steps: The expectation step (E-step) and maximization step
(M-step). In this study, the endpoint of the tests was set at N0 = 2 × 106, and the conditional probability distribution function is expressed as
follows:

F(N ) − F(N0 )
F(N |N ≥ N0 ) =
1 − F(N0 )

m  
 
α N α N0 m
1 − exp −λA0 (ΔS) − 1 + exp −λA0 (ΔS)
g(ΔS) g(ΔS)
= 
m 
N
1 − 1 + exp −λA0 (ΔS)α
0
g(ΔS)

m
 
α N α N0 m
= 1 − exp −λA0 (ΔS) + λA0 (ΔS) (6)
g(ΔS) g(ΔS)

and the conditional probability density function is expressed as follows:

m−1
λmA0 (ΔS)α N
fN ≥N0 (N ) =
g(ΔS) g(ΔS)

m
m 
N N
× exp −λA0 (ΔS)α + λA0 (ΔS)α (7)
g(ΔS) g(ΔS)

© ASCE 04022096-4 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2022, 27(10): 04022096

 The expected fatigue life of the specimens under a stress range
of 290 MPa after 500°C is expressed as follows:
∞
m−1
λmA0 (ΔS)α N
EN ≥N0 (N ) = N
N0 g(ΔS) g(ΔS)



N m N0 m
× exp −λA0 (ΔS)α + λA0 (ΔS)α dN
g(ΔS) g(ΔS)

 
m
α α N0 m ∞ N
= λmA0 (ΔS) exp λA0 (ΔS)
g(ΔS) N0 g(ΔS)

m 
N
× exp −λA0 (ΔS)α dN (8)
g(ΔS)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southeast University on 10/13/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The previous expression can be solved by numerical integration.

The E-step estimates the expected value via Eq. (8) based on the (a)
complete data; The M-step then takes the estimated value and com-
plete data into Eq. (5), and estimates the parameter of Eq. (2) via
maximum likelihood method. E-step and M-step are repeated
until convergence is achieved, and the convergence processes of
the EM algorithm parameters are plotted in Fig. 6.
As shown in Fig. 7, the resulting curve is an approximately
straight line, which indicates that the proposed model fits the fa-
tigue data well. In addition, the Kolmogorov–Smirnov (K–S) test
was performed, which further confirmed that the Weibull model
was appropriate. All estimated parameters are listed in Table 4.

Discussion
The test results are summarized, and the failure cycles are plotted as
a function of the cyclic stress range. As shown in Fig. 8, the number
(b)
of wire fatigue cycles increased and became scattered as the stress
range decreased. Comparing Figs. 7(a and b) at the same cyclic
stress range, the fatigue cycle decreased significantly as the expo-
sure temperature increased, indicating that high temperature can
significantly reduce the life of steel wires.

Fatigue Life of Parallel Wire Hanger

To date, the fatigue response of steel wire after high-temperature

treatment has been experimentally investigated and statistically de-
scribed; however, the results obtained do not represent the actual
response of a hanger consisting of many wires. In the following,
a model is presented, and the fatigue life of the hanger was evalu-
ated using two methods.
(c)

Model for Fatigue Life Prediction Fig. 6. Convergence process of parameters in EM algorithm: (a) pa-
rameter λ; (b) parameter α; and (c) parameter m.
The hanger can be modeled as a bundle consisting of n steel wires
of the same diameter and length arranged in parallel, where the fric-
tion among the wires is disregarded, as shown in Fig. 9, ΔL denotes
Table 4. Estimated parameters of Weibull distribution for fatigue life of
the repeated load range applied to cable. Coleman (1958) and
steel wires
Phoenix (1978a) were the first to establish a theoretical fatigue
model for fiber bundles. The model was subsequently extended Temperature α m λ
by Rackwitz and Faber (1991) and applied to parallel-wire cables. 500°C 52.09 9.95 3.42 × 10−196
The fatigue load applied to the hanger was an axial non-negative 600°C 37.74 8.03 3.90 × 10−146
load with a constant range. Under cyclic loading, the wire with
the smallest failure time failed first in the system, followed by
that with the second-smallest failure time. One after the other fails, the force is redistributed among the remaining n-i compo-
breaks because of fatigue damage. Assume that any broken wire nents, and the stress range becomes,
loses its load-carrying capacity, and all surviving members equally
share the load at any time. This assumption is appropriate for hang- n
ΔSi = ΔS (9)
ers clamped at the two ends using an anchor. After the ith element n−i

© ASCE 04022096-5 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2022, 27(10): 04022096

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southeast University on 10/13/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(a) (b)

Fig. 7. Weibull probability plot of fatigue life of wires: (a) 500°C; and (b) 600°C.

(a) (b)

Fig. 8. Summary of steel wire fatigue test results: (a) 500°C; and (b) 600°C.

Fig. 9. Modeling of parallel wire bundles.
where n = total number of wires in the hanger; i = number of bro-
ken wires; and ΔS = initial stress range.
As shown in Eq. (9), the stress range among the surviving wires
increases progressively, and the growing stress range accelerates
the cumulative damage in the remaining wires, resulting in faster
wire breakage in the cable. Finally, all wires failed.
Fatigue Life Prediction of Hanger
Monte Carlo Simulation
The Monte Carlo method was used to generate 109 random numbers
corresponding to the Weibull distribution, which simulates the fa-
tigue life of each wire in the hanger. These random lives are
arranged in ascending order (i.e., N1 < N2 < … < Ni < … < N109).
The level of damage under cyclic loading is defined by the well-
known Miner’s fatigue rule: Mi = Ni/Nr, where Nr is the reference
fatigue life, for example, the mean life at a certain stress range.
The fatigue cycles of individual wires depend on the accumulation
of continuous fatigue damage derived from their load histories.
Under a constant axial load range, the first wire in the system
broke when the number of cycles reached N1, which is the
smallest value generated by the Monte Carlo method. Subse-
quently, the stress range among the remaining wires is n/(n−1)
ΔS. As the cyclic load continued, the second-smallest wire failed
when the cumulative damage reached M2, and the number of cy-
cles was
  n −B 
N ′2 = Nr M1 + (M2 − M1 ) (10)
n−1
In the general form, the number of cycles when the ith wire frac-
tures can be deduced by analogy, as shown in (11) (Stallings and
Frank 1991b). N ′n is the number of cycles when the last wire
fails and is defined as the system fatigue life.

−B 
i
n
N ′i = Nr (Mj − M j−1 ) (11)
j=1
n−j+1

© ASCE 04022096-6 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2022, 27(10): 04022096

 From (11), the fatigue life is directly proportional to the mean
life of the wire and decreases with slope parameter B. The accuracy
of the Monte Carlo simulation up to the number of trials and 2000
trials was sufficient, according to a previous study (Lan et al.
2017b). Taking a hanger subject to a mean load of 1,155.13 kN
and a constant load range of 770.09 kN (i.e., the initial stress
range of a single wire was 360 MPa) as an example, the results
are shown in Fig. 10. The results could be described by a normal
distribution, and the mean value and standard deviation were ob-
tained by regression analysis.

Order Statistics Approach

An alternative approach to determining the fatigue life
distribution of a hanger is a theoretical analysis based on the the-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southeast University on 10/13/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ory of order statistics. We assume that the lives of the componen-

tial wires are independent and identically distributed. First,
Fig. 10. Distribution of hanger fatigue life.
define


1 −B
φ(x) = (12)
1−x

The derivative of (12) is


−B 1 −B
φ′ (x) = = −B(1 − x)B−1 (13)
1−x 1−x


−B
j−1 n
Therefore, φ = (14)
n n−j+1

where x denotes the percentage of failed wires. Thus, (11) can be

rewritten as follows:
Fig. 11. Comparison of fatigue lives of hanger and componential wire.


n
j−1
′
Nn= (Nj − N j−1 )φ
j=1
n

 For n = 1, 2, 3, …, let,
1
= (N1 − N0 )φ(0) + (N2 − N1 )φ ⎧ 

n ⎪
⎪ n φ(0) − φ
1
for 0 ≤ u <
1

 ⎪
⎪
n−1 ⎪
⎪ n n + 1
+ · · · + (Nn − Nn−1 )φ ⎪
⎨ 
u(n + 1) 1

n u(n + 1) 1 n
Jn (u) = n φ − −φ for ≤u≤


 ⎪
⎪ n n n n + 1 n + 1
1 1 ⎪ 

⎪  
= N1 φ(0) + N2 φ − N1 φ ⎪
⎪ n − 1 n
n n ⎪
⎩n φ − φ(1) for <u<1




 n n+1
2 2 n−1 n−1
+ N3 φ − N2 φ + · · · + Nn φ − Nn−1 φ (16)
n n n n





 and let J(u) = − φ′ (u), for 0 ≤ u ≤ 1.
1 1 2
= N1 φ(0) − φ + N2 φ −φ Therefore,
n n n






+ · · · + Nn−1 φ
n−2
−φ
n−1
+ Nn φ
n−1 1 n
j
Nn′ = Jn Nj (17)
n n n n j=1 n+1

n−1




j−1 j n−1
= φ −φ Nj + Nn φ which is a linear function of the order statistics. Phoenix (1978b)
n n n
j=1
verified that the sequence of functions {Jn}, n = 1, 2, 3, … uni-
n−1





  formly converges to function J on [0, 1], based on the mean
j−1 j n−1
= φ −φ + Nn φ − φ(1) value theorem, which implies that {Jn}, n = 1, 2, 3, … is bounded
j=1
n n n
and continuous. Therefore, the conditions in Remark 2 of Stigler



 (1974)
n
j−1 j (15) √are
 satisfied. According to Theorem 2 of Stigler (1974),
= φ −φ Nj Tn = n{N ′ n − μ} /σ is asymptotically normally distributed
n n
j=1 with mean 0 and variance 1 as in n → ∞, where,

© ASCE 04022096-7 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2022, 27(10): 04022096

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southeast University on 10/13/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(a)

(b)

Fig. 12. Probability distribution of fatigue life of hanger under four load ranges at 5% breakage: (a) 500°C; and (b) 600°C.

© ASCE 04022096-8 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2022, 27(10): 04022096

 Furthermore,
∞ ∞
σ2 = φ′ (F(u))φ′ (F(v))Γ(u, v)dudv
0 0
∞  ∞
= B2 [(1 − F(u))(1 − F(v))]B−1 Γ(u, v)dudv (19)
0 0

where

F(u)[1 − F(v)] for 0≤u≤v
Γ(u, v) =
F(v)[1 − F(u)] for 0≤v≤u
As discussed previously, (18) and (19) represent the mean and
variance of the system, respectively, which can be solved via nu-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southeast University on 10/13/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

merical integration. The integration results show that the mean

value and standard deviation were 478,755 and 14,230, respec-
tively, which are almost identical to the results from the Monte
Fig. 13. P–S–N curves of hanger (5% breakage).
Carlo simulation.

Comparison between Fatigue Lives of Hanger and Wire

Fig. 14. Effect of number of wires on hanger fatigue life.
The fatigue life of a single wire can be regarded as that of a bun-
dle subjected to a constant stress range, as shown in Fig. 11. The
hanger fatigue lives are also plotted in Fig. 11 for comparison.
The fatigue life of the hanger was significantly lower than that
of the steel wire, which was approximately three-quarters of
the steel wire mean life. Initially, when only a few wires broke,
the two curves almost overlapped. However, as the number of
wire breaks increases, the curve of the hanger life becomes al-
most vertical after approximately one-quarter of the wires fail.
This is primarily due to the effect of increased stress range as
the wire breaks, which results in the accelerated failure of
wires in the hanger. Consequently, the fatigue life of a hanger
is governed by a relatively small proportion of members with
short lives.
Conversely, the increment in the stress range was extremely
small when only a small wire break percentage was used; hence,
the fatigue life of the hanger when the wire breakage p was a rela-
tively small number (i.e., 5%) was slightly lower than that of the
wire at p probability of failure. Taking ΔS = 360 as an example,
the life of the hanger at 5% breakage is 415,551, which is very
close to the life of the wire at a 5% probability of failure,
432,355, and the difference between the two values is approxi-
mately 4%.

Result and Discussion

S–N Curves of Hanger
Fig. 10 shows a hanger’s fatigue life characteristics. However, the
hanger may statically fail when the cross section is sufficiently
small because of fatigue failure. Therefore, both the MTC (2001)
and the Standardization Administration of China (SAC 2018) spec-
ified that the wire breakage rate should not exceed 5%. In this
study, the fatigue life of the hanger was defined as a fatigue failure
of 5% (five wires) in the hanger.
Likewise, the life of a hanger at 5% breakage under different
load ranges can be obtained in the same manner as introduced in
Fig. 15. Effect of number of wires on hanger variability. the Hanger fatigue life prediction section. The results are presented
in Fig. 12, which shows that the life at a 5% breakage also follows a
normal distribution (five wires).
The relationship between the fatigue lives of the hanger and
the stress range can be expressed by the following empirical
∞ equation:
μ= φ[FN (y)]dy (18)
0 lg Nh = C − DlgΔL (20)

© ASCE 04022096-9 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2022, 27(10): 04022096

 Fig. 16. Shape and dimensions of test cable (unit: mm).
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southeast University on 10/13/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

constant load range of 770.09 kN as an example). It is observed

that the mean life was unaffected by the number of wires in the
hanger. Furthermore, the lives at a 5% probability of failure grad-
ually approached the mean life as the number of wires increased,
and it converged to a constant value. This reveals that the hanger
life variability decreased with the wire number increase, and fatigue
properties tend to be stable. These features were also confirmed by
Phoenix (1978b). The decreasing variable coefficient trend is
shown in Fig. 15.

Experimental Verification

Test Procedure
To verify the accuracy of the proposed model, two small cables
consisting of 19 parallel wires were fabricated. The shape and di-
mensions of the test cable are illustrated in Fig. 16. First, the sam-
ples were exposed to temperatures of 500°C and 600°C and then
cooled to ambient air temperature. The entire heating process
was identical to that of the wire.
Finally, the fatigue tests were conducted. A hydraulic servocon-
Fig. 17. Fatigue test of cable.
trol testing machine (Fig. 17) with a dynamic capacity of 1,000 kN
was used to impose constant load ranges of 134.2 and 160.3 kN at
10 Hz under force control, which imply that the initial stress range
Table 5. Load ranges of cable fatigue tests (kN) of a single wire in the cable was 360 and 430 MPa, respectively
Exposure Load Maximum Minimum Mean (Table 5). The number of cycles for each wire break was manually
No. temperature range load load load recorded.
Cable 500°C 160.3 320.7 160.3 240.5
no. 1
Result and Comparison
Cable 600°C 134.2 268.5 134.2 201.3
no. 2 The number of cycles at which the wire broke was compared be-
tween the simulation and experimental results, as shown in
Fig. 18. The fatigue behavior of the cables obtained through the
where Nh = fatigue life of the hanger; and ΔL = load range. C de- simulation was consistent with the experimental results, demon-
notes the probability level, and D is a constant. The least-squares strating the accuracy of the proposed method. Alternatively, it
method was used to fit the mean hanger life under the four load was observed that after approximately half of the wires in the
ranges; the results are shown in Fig. 13. cable broke, the remaining wires simultaneously collapsed, which
Similarly, the life at any failure probability can be obtained. For may be because the maximum fatigue load exceeded the residual
example, the P–S–N curves at a 5% probability of failure based on a capacity of the cable. The fracture surface morphology obtained
5% wire breakage life are also shown in Fig. 13. by scanning electron microscopes also supports this conclusion.
Fig. 19 shows that approximately half of the photographs display
Effect of Number of Wires on Fatigue Life of Hanger the typical fatigue fracture characteristic without a ductile phenom-
Fig. 14 plots the mean life and the life at a 5% probability of failure enon at the broken parts; however, the other half show necking phe-
varies with the number of wires (also taking a hanger subject to a nomenon with some radiating fibers.

© ASCE 04022096-10 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2022, 27(10): 04022096

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southeast University on 10/13/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(a) (b)

Fig. 18. Comparison between simulation and test results: (a) Cable No. 1; and (b) Cable No. 2.

used to manage the censored data. Based on the fatigue life distri-
bution of the steel wires and the corresponding parallel system,
the fatigue cycles of the hanger subjected to a constant load
range were derived using Monte Carlo simulation and the order
statistics approach, and the S–N curves were obtained. Finally,
the proposed model was experimentally verified. The following
conclusions were drawn:
1. The fatigue properties of steel wires degrade when they are
subjected to elevated temperatures. When heated below 500°C,
all specimens could resist 2 million cyclic loads without frac-
ture, as required in the standard; however, when they were ex-
posed to temperatures exceeding 500°C, their fatigue lives
decreased significantly. Similar to the steel wire, the hanger
life decreased as the exposure temperature increased, and its re-
(a) sidual performance depended on the maximum temperature
reached. This indicates that a fire can reduce the service life
of a hanger.
2. The wire life was well modeled by the Weibull distribution, and
the hanger life was proven to obey a normal distribution based
on the parallel system.
3. The hanger life is far lower than the mean life of its constituent
wires owing to the effect of the growing stress range as individ-
ual wires break, which is consistent with the experimental ob-
servations. The hanger life is insensitive to the number of
wires in the hanger; however, its variability decreases as the
number of wires increases.
4. It is reasonable to adopt the number of cycles at a 5% probability
of wire failure as the hanger fatigue life at which 5% of the wires
break.
The present study can be used as a reference for the safety eval-
(b)
uation of cable-supported bridges after a fire.
Fatigue failure Stress rupture

Fig. 19. Fracture surface of cables: (a) Cable No. 1; and (b) Cable Data Availability Statement
No. 2.
All test data are available from the corresponding author by request.

Conclusion
The fatigue properties of hangers after fire exposure were investi-
gated in this study. Several fatigue tests were conducted on steel
wires after cooling from various elevated temperatures. A Weibull
distribution was adopted to describe the fatigue life of the steel
wire under specified stress ranges, and the EM algorithm was
Acknowledgments
Support from the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province
under Grant No. BK20210255 is gratefully acknowledged. Support
from the Innovation Program for Bridge Engineering Research
Center of Southeast University is gratefully acknowledged.

© ASCE 04022096-11 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2022, 27(10): 04022096

 References
Birkenmaier, M., and R. Narayanan. 1982. “Fatigue resistance of large high ten-
sile steel stay tendons.” Int. Assoc. Bridge Struct. Eng. Rep. 37: 663–672.
Canteli, A. F. 1992. “Length effect on fatigue of wires and strands.” In
Proc., Int., Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering
Workshop, 125–138. Zurich, Switzerland: International Association
for Bridge and Structural Engineering.
Castillo, E., V. Esslinger, and A. F. Canteli. 1985. “Statistical model for fa-
tigue analysis of wires, strands and cables.” In Proc., Int. Association
for Bridge and Structural Engineering, 82–85. Zurich, Switzerland:
International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering.
Coleman, B. D. 1958. “Statistics and time dependence of mechanical
breakdown in fibers.” J. Appl. Phys. 29 (6): 968–983. https://doi.org
/10.1063/1.1723343.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southeast University on 10/13/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Dempster, A. P., N. M. Laird, and D. B. Rubin. 1977. “Maximum likeli-
hood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm.” J. R. Stat. Soc.
39: 1–22.
Faber, M. H., S. Engelund, and R. Rackwitz. 2003. “Aspects of parallel
wire cable reliability.” Struct. Saf. 25 (2): 201–225. https://doi.org/10
.1016/S0167-4730(02)00057-7.
Freudenthal, A. M., and E. J. Gumbel. 1953. “On the statistical interpreta-
tion of fatigue tests.” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 216 (1126):
309–332.
Garlock, M., I. Paya-Zaforteza, V. Kodur, and L. Gu. 2012. “Fire hazard in
bridges: Review, assessment and repair strategies.” Eng. Struct. 35:
89–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.11.002.
Gong, X., and A. K. Agrawal. 2016. “Safety of cable-supported bridges
during fire hazards.” J. Bridge Eng. 21 (4): 04015082. https://doi.org
/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000870.
Jiang, J. H., A. B. Ma, W. F. Weng, G. H. Fu, Y. F. Zhang, G. G. Liu, and
F. M. Lu. 2009. “Corrosion fatigue performance of pre-split steel wires
for high strength bridge cables.” Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct.
32 (9): 769–779. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2695.2009.01384.x.
Kodur, V., L. Gu, and M. E. M. Garlock. 2010. “Review and assessment of
fire hazard in bridges.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2172: 23–29. https://doi.org
/10.3141/2172-03.
Lan, C. 2009. “Fatigue properties assessment theory of parallel wire cable.”
J. Shenyang Jianzhu Univ. 25 (1): 56–60.
Lan, C., D. Ren, Y. Xu, N. Li, and Z. Liu. 2017a. “Fatigue property assess-
ment of parallel wire stay cable II: Fatigue life model for stay cable.”
Chin. Civ. Eng. J. 50 (7): 69–77.
Lan, C., Y. Xu, D. Ren, N. Li, and Z. Liu. 2017b. “Fatigue property assess-
ment of parallel wire stay cable I: Fatigue life model for wire.” Chin.
Civ. Eng. J. 50 (6): 62–70.
Li, H., C. M. Lan, Y. Ju, and D. S. Li. 2012. “Experimental and numerical
study of the fatigue properties of corroded parallel wire cables.”
J. Bridge Eng. 17 (2): 211–220. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE
.1943-5592.0000235.
Liu, Z., T. Guo, M. H. Hebdon, and Z. Zhang. 2019. “Measurement and
comparative study on movements of suspenders in long-span suspen-
sion bridges.” J. Bridge Eng. 24 (5): 04019026. https://doi.org/10
.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001386.
Liu, Z., T. Guo, L. Huang, and Z. Pan. 2017. “Fatigue life evaluation on
short suspenders of long-span suspension bridge with central clamps.”
J. Bridge Eng. 22 (10): 04017074. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE
.1943-5592.0001097.
Lu, J., H. Liu, and Z. Chen. 2017. “Post-fire mechanical properties of low-
relaxation hot-dip galvanized prestressed steel wires.” J. Constr. Steel
Res. 136: 110–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2017.05.012.
Matsukawa, A., M. Kamei, T. Mizoguchi, and Y. Sasaki. 1988. “Fatigue
resistance analysis of parallel wire strand cables based on statistical the-
ory of extremes.” Int. J. Fatigue 57 (7): 205–210.
© ASCE 04022096-12
J. Bridge Eng., 2022, 27(10): 04022096
Min Park, C., J. Gyun Paik, S. Hoon Shin, and H. K. Kim. 2013. “New ap-
proach on the safety factor of cable in long-span bridges.” In Vol. 101 of
Proc., Int. Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering Symp.,
Long Span Bridges and Roofs - Development, Design and
Implementation, 1–7. Zurich, Switzerland: International Association
for Bridge and Structural Engineering.
MTC (Ministry of Transport of China). 2001. Hanger of highway suspen-
sion bridge. JT/T 449-2001. Beijing: MTC.
Petrini, F., and F. Bontempi. 2011. “Estimation of fatigue life for long span
suspension bridge hangers under wind action and train transit.” Struct.
Infrastruct. Eng. 7 (7–8): 491–507. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479
.2010.493336.
Phoenix, S. L. 1978a. “Stochastic strength and fatigue of fiber bundles.”
Int. J. Fract. 14 (3): 327–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00034692.
Phoenix, S. L. 1978b. “The asymptotic time to failure of a mechanical sys-
tem of parallel members.” SIAM J. Appl. Math. 34 (2): 227–246. https://
doi.org/10.1137/0134021.
PTI (Post-Tension Institute) Cable-Stayed Bridge Committee. 2007.
Recommendations for stay cable design, testing and installation. 5th
ed. PTI DC45.1-12. Farmington Hills, MI: PTI.
Quiel, S., T. Yokoyama, K. Mueller, L. Bregman, and S. Marjanishvili.
2015. “Mitigating the effects of a tanker truck fire on a cable-stayed
bridge.” In Proc., 2nd Int. Conf., on Performance-Based and
Life-Cycle Structural Engineering, edited by D. Fernando, J.-G. Teng
and J. L. Torero, 1002–1012. St Lucia, Queensland, Australia: Univ.
of Queensland.
Rackwitz, R., and M. H. Faber. 1991. “Reliability of parallel wire cable
under fatigue.” In Proc., Int. Conf., on Applications of Statistics &
Probability in Civil Engineering, 166–175. San Francisco, CA:
International Civil Engineering Risk and Reliability Association.
SAC (Standardization Administration of China). 2017. Hot rolled steel
wire rod for prestressed steel wire and strand. GB/T 24238-2017.
Beijing: SAC.
SAC (Standardization Administration of China). 2018. Hot-extruded PE
protection paralleled high strength wire cable for cable-stayed bridge.
GB/T 18365-2018. Beijing: SAC.
SAC (Standardization Administration of China). 2019. Hot-dip zinc or
zinc-aluminum coated steel wire for bridge cables. GB/T
17101-2019. Beijing: SAC.
Stallings, J. M., and K. H. Frank. 1991a. “Cyclic fatigue life of cables.”
Eng. Fract. Mech. 38: 341–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013
-7944(91)90013-Q.
Stallings, J. M., and K. H. Frank. 1991b. “Stay-cable fatigue behavior.”
J. Struct. Eng. 117 (3): 936–950. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733
-9445(1991)117:3(936).
Stigler, S. M. 1974. “Linear functions of order statistics with smooth weight
functions.” Ann. Stat. 2 (4): 676–693. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos
/1176342756.
Tao, Z. 2015. “Mechanical properties of prestressing steel after fire expo-
sure.” Mater. Struct. 48 (9): 3037–3047. https://doi.org/10.1617
/s11527-014-0377-5.
Tian, Z., J. Yang, and X. Zhong. 2011. “A method for reliability analysis of
incomplete fatigue life based on an expectation maximization algo-
rithm.” J. Beijing Univ. Chem. Technol. 38 (3): 104–107.
Weibull, W. 1951. “A statistical distribution function of wide applicabil-
ity.” J. Appl. Mech. 18: 293–297. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4010337.
Zhang, Z., T. Guo, S. Wang, J. Liu, and L. Wang. 2021. “Experimental
study on post-fire properties of steel wires of bridge suspender.”
Structures 33: 1252–1262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.04.099.
Zheng, W., Q. Hu, and H. Zhang. 2006. “Experimental research on the me-
chanical property of prestressing steel wire during and after heating.”
J. Build. Struct. 27 (2): 120–128.
J. Bridge Eng.