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

net/publication/237817210

Strength of parallel wire cables for suspension bridges

Article · January 2000

CITATIONS READS
6 2,706

3 authors, including:

Gongkang Fu
Illinois Institute of Technology
82 PUBLICATIONS 1,282 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

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

CNSF，MDOT View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gongkang Fu on 08 June 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

8th ASCE Specialty Conference on Probabilistic Mechanics and Structural Reliability PMC2000-222

STRENGTH OF PARALLEL WIRE CABLES FOR SUSPENSION BRIDGES

Gongkang Fu, M.ASCE
Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48202
gfu@ce.eng.wayne.edu

Fred Moses, M.ASCE

University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh PA PA15261

Dyab A. Khazem, M.ASCE

Parsons Transportation Group, New York, NY 10038
dyab.a.khazem@parsons.com

Abstract

This paper focuses on modeling the strength of suspension bridge cables made of parallel high-strength
wires. Previously proposed models are briefly reviewed first. It is pointed out that ductility limits and their
uncertainty have not been adequately covered in these models. A new probabilistic model is then
proposed, using the Monte Carlo simulation method to cover wires’ ductility limits and associated
uncertainty. Application of the model is illustrated by an example. The results agree with physical test
observations well. This also shows that it is important to acquire stress-strain relation in wire sample
testing and use it in estimating cable strength. Further work is underway to evaluate the proposed model
for application to cables with a larger number of wires.

Introduction

There are approximately 50 suspension bridges in this country, representing a relatively

older group of the entire suspension bridge population in the world. Most of these US
bridges are reaching an age when their structural safety has become or will soon become
of concern. The main cables in these structures are primary load-carrying members
which are of special importance in safety evaluation. It is thus urgent to develop rational
guidelines for the practice of cable inspection and safety evaluation. Although a large
amount of experience has been cumulated for cable inspection in recent years, cable
safety evaluation has not been consistently practiced. This paper focuses on modeling the
strength of suspension bridge cables consisting of parallel high-strength wires. Such
modeling is critical to evaluating the safety of suspension bridges, which represent
significant investments in the transportation infrastructure system.

Review of Previously Proposed Models

For cable evaluation, the most extensive test data reported to date are from the
Williamsburg Bridge in New York City (Steinman 1988). Using this set of data, Matteo
et at (1994) developed a method to estimate the cables’ strength for evaluating their
safety. It perhaps is the first systematic attempt reported in this area. For load sharing
among wires in a cable, Matteo et al (1994) used two models to describe the cable

Fu, Moses, and Khazem 1

behavior at an ultimate load: ductile and ductile-brittle models. The ductile model
implicitly assumes that each and every unbroken wire in the cable cross-section possesses
perfect ductility, so that they ultimately fail simultaneously. The ductile-brittle model
also assumes perfect ductility for the wires, but with brittle wires excluded from the cable
coss-seciotn. Brittle wires were defined as those that have an elongation limit less than
0.6 percent. Actually, test results show that all wires are brittle to some degree, as shown
by a typical wire stress stain relation in Fig.1 (Bieniek 1990). This model ignores the
interaction among wires in load- and deformation-sharing, as well as the uncertainty in
this process. This interaction became impossible to model when thousands of wires were
averaged as done.

Perry (1999) proposed another set of models for cable strength estimation. The Type III
extreme distribution was used to model wire strength uncertainty and the same concept
was used for averaging wire properties over the cable cross section. Namely, no
distinction was made among deteriorated and intact wires in modeling wire strength.
Further, the same ductile model as in (Matteo et al 1994) was used as one model. The
second model was for brittle wires and it used the statistics for the so-called Daniels
Model (1945). That model is advantageous in that the threads (or wires) are modeled as
brittle material. Namely, there is a strength limit for a thread (or wire) to break. On the
other hand, the Daniels Model was developed with an assumption that all threads in the
system have an identical probability distribution and there exists no deformation limit for
the threads to elongate. This assumption may be reasonable for textile fibers for which
the model was originally developed, but is questionable for wires in a suspension bridge
cable.

Betti et al. (1998, 1999) proposed a model that plausibly addressed the role of sequential
wire breakage in the process of cable failure. They also provided test results showing
that cable strength (by testing) is indeed lower than that predicted by the ductile model
discussed above - by more than 10 percent. Although the cable force was first described
as a function of strain in the proposed model, the subsequent simplification in the
analysis treated the cable force as a function of only the wire forces with the variable of
wire strain excluded. This simplification was based on an assumption that the wire
stress-strain curves are essentially identical. In reality, this may hardly be the case, as
shown in test data (Steinman 1988).

The above models focused on a section of the cable, believed to be the weakest section.
This cable section is assumed to be clamped at its two ends. Clamping is provided by
bands connecting the cable and the suspensions. Based on field testing results, the length
of a clamped section is about 1 to 3 intervals between bands (Matteo et at. 1994,
Steinman 1988). The cable actually has a large number of these sections. Being a non-
redundant system, the cable may fail when any one of these sections fails. When these
sections are highly statistically correlated, the cable’s safety (which is a system-
reliability) is about equal to the smallest value of any section’s safety (which are the
component reliabilities). When the correlation between these sections is reduced (for
example, due to degradation), the system reliability decreases considerably if a large
number of sections are involved. This will decrease the system reliability possibly below

Fu, Moses, and Khazem 2

that of the worst section. This effect needs to be taken into account in cable strength
modeling.

Proposed Cable Strength Model

The failure of a cable under increasing load is a complex process, because the composing
wires interact with each other in sharing load and deformation. It is also a process with
uncertainty. For example, the strength and ductility-limit are not constant for all the
wires. A model for describing cable failure under load is proposed here. This model is
intended to provide a rational method for determining a nominal cable capacity for safety
evaluation. This model should also be used for understanding the cable capacity’s
expected value and uncertainty. Accordingly a probabilistic model is used here.

A wire segment may fail under a load due to either excessive force or excessive
deformation (possibly occurring in a local area). When any one of these two conditions is
realized, the segment fails. Ideally perfect ductility that permits a wire to yield without
strain limit does not exist. With this view, it is not difficult to state that all wires are
brittle with various levels of brittleness. The ductility limit is emphasized here, which
was not adequately covered in the previous models. Furthermore, associated
uncertainties are also addressed in this model.

A section of the cable is modeled here as a system of N wires in parallel, and each wire
consists of M segments. The mechanical properties of a segment can be described by its
stress-strain curve as shown in Fig.1 as an example for a wire segment extracted from the
Williamsburg Bridge (Bieniekw 1990). Under a load S, these N wires (if not broken) will
be subject to the same amount of deformation. Note that these wires may not carry the
same load (i.e., S is not equally shared by the wires) depending on the wires’ cross
sections, yield strengths, etc. Further, strain and thus deformation may not be uniformly
distributed along a wire, because the ductility of each segment may not be identical. As a
matter of fact, deformation may “concentrate” in certain segments where severe
deterioration has taken place, making them break earlier than other segments and wires.
Thus, when the load increases, a segment of wire will fail first due to excessive stress or
strain, then the wire containing this segment fails. The load carried by the broken wire
then has to be taken over by other wires in the cross-section. This process will continue
until all wires fail. The maximum load reached in this process is defined as the section’s
cable capacity. Note that there may be significant uncertainties in the capacities of these
segments and wires.

This model can be realized by computer simulation to include the interaction among
wires. For applying the proposed model to a cable with a large number (thousands) of
wires, over the cross-section of the cable, the wires need to be grouped according to their
behavior in strength and ductility, as well as the type and severity of deterioration. Then,
a number of wire samples need to be taken and physically tested, and statistics describing
the wire’s strength and ductility limits should be established for each group using these
in-situ samples. This cable section’s strength can be modeled using the Monte Carlo
simulation. Mechanical properties of the wires are treated as random variables for each

Fu, Moses, and Khazem 3

wire group. They include the controlling points in the stress stain curves, such as
ε1, σ1, ε2, σ2, Ε2, and εu in Fig.1. Within each group, the same probability distributions
are used to describe these random variables. The statistical parameters of these random
variables are determined using the test results. The Monte Carlo simulation will start
with generating realizations of these random variables. These realizations are then used
to calculate realizations of the ultimate strength of the cable. The loading process is
simulated using a deformation control approach. Namely, the deformation of the cable
(equal to that of the wires) will be increased by increments. At each increment, the
wires’ ductility limits are checked. When this limit is reached for a group of wires, the
cable’s load capacity is then computed. Then this wire group is excluded from the cable
cross section, and the next deformation increment is imposed for repetitive computations
until all the groups of wires have failed. This process establishes a load-deformation
curve for the cable. The maximum load reached in the curve is taken as the cable
strength. When an adequate number of cable strength realizations is obtained using this
simulation method, relevant statistical parameters can be estimated for the cable stength,
such as the mean, standard deviation, and possibly the probability distribution.

For a cable made of many sections, any one or more sections’ failure will lead to the
cable’s failure. This “chain” system’s reliability depends on the sections’ mutual
statistical dependence. The system (cable) reliability could be significantly reduced when
the sections’ correlation reduces and the number of sections becomes large (Fu 1994).

Above discussions for cable failure refer to one single time in the service life of a cable.
However, the strength of a cable reduces with time due to cable degradation. The stength
estimation for a cable should reflect its time-dependent degradation. For the proposed
model it is not difficult to update the wires’ strength and ductility limits at different times
when such information becomes available. Cable degradation is possibly influenced by a
variety of factors. Examples are atmospheric corrosion, pitting corrosion, fatigue
corrosion, stress corrosion, and hydrogen embritlement.

An Example

For simplicity and advantages of available test data, an example of cable with 7 wires are
included here for illustration. These wires were taken from the Williamsburg Bridge in
New York (Steinman 1988). Three wire samples were tested to obtain their stress-strain
curve. A typical example is shown in Fig.1. These curves consist of three stages. The
first stage exhibits a linear elastic behavior from the origin to point (ε1,σ1). The second
stage shows a nonlinear behavior (also inelastic in a later portion), starting at (ε1,σ1) and
ending at (ε2,σ2). The third one exhibits a linear stress-stain relation, starting at
(ε2,σ2) and ending at an ultimate strain εu. This linear relation is characterized by this
stage’s constant tangent marked as E2 in Fig.1. The wire test results are used here to
obtain the statistical parameters needed for the Monte Carlo simulation.

For estimating the ultimate strength of the 7-wire cables using the proposed model, a total
of 5 random variables are used in this example, namely, ε2, σ2, Ε2, εu, and A, where A is
the cross section of wire. Due to the limited data used here, the correlation of these

Fu, Moses, and Khazem 4

random variables could not be reliably estimated. It is assumed then that these random
variables are not correlated. A total of 20 cable samples are used here. Each cable sample
consists of 7 wires, each having 5 realizations respectively for the 5 random variables.
Two choices of the probability distributions for these 5 random variables are used:
normal and lognormal distributions for all the random variables. This is because the
limited data did not permit reliable estimation for the probability distribution types. The
mean value of the cable strength was found to be 43.06 and 42.01 kips (191.5 and 186.1
kN) respectively for the normal and lognormal distribution assumptions. The test results
give an average of 42.17 kips (187.6 kN) based on the three 7-wire cables tested (Bieniek
1990). These results are reasonably close to each other.

Conclusions

Previously proposed strength estimation models for suspension bridge cables do not
adequately cover the ductility limits of the wires. The model proposed herein uses a
probabilistic approach to taking this important aspect into account. The example shows
that the proposed model can reasonably predict the ultimate strength of cables, based on
comparison with physical test results. It highlights the importance for acquiring full
information on the stress-strain relation for wires. Further work is needed to evaluate the
proposed model for cables with a larger number of wires.

250

200 E2 εu
ε2, σ2
(ksi)

1 50
ε1, σ1
Stress

1 00

50

0
0 0.5 1 1 .5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Strain ε (%)

Figure 1 Typical Stress Strain Relation of Suspension Bridge Cable Wire

Acknowledgements

It is acknowledged that the work reported here was performed under support from the CULMA of Wayne
State University and the US Federal Highway Administration. This suport is gratefully appreciated.

References

Betti,R. and Bieniek,M.P. (1998) “The Condition of Suspension Bridge Cables”, Technical Report to
NYCDOT, NYS Bridge Authority, Port Authority of NY&NJ, Triborough Bridge &Tunnel Authority,
Columbia Univ., New York, NY

Fu, Moses, and Khazem 5

 Betti,R. and Yanev,B. (1999) “ Conditions of Suspension Bridge Cables: The New York City case Study”,
1999 TRB Annual Meeting
Bieniek,M.P. (1990) “Williamsburg Bridge Cable Rehabilitation – Testing Program of Resin-Poured
Sockets”, Final Report to Steinman, Aug. 1990
Daniels,H.E. “The Statistical Theory of the Strength of Bundles of Threads. I” Proceedings of the Royal
Society of London, Series A, 183, p.405
Fu,G. (1994) "Variance Reduction by Truncated Multimodal Importance Sampling", International Journal
of Structural Safety, Vol.13, 1994, p.267
Matteo,J., Deodadis,G., and Billinginton,D.P. (1994) “Safety Analysis of Suspension Bridge Cables:
Williamsburg Bridge”, ASCE J. of Structural Engineering, Vol.120, No.11, 1994
Perry,R.J. (1999) “Estimating Suspension Cable Strength”, ASCE Struc.Cong, New Orleans, LA,
4/19/1999, p.442
Steinman, Boynton, Gronquist, and Birdsall (1988) in Association with Columbia University
“Williamsburg Bridge Cable Investigation Program”, Final Report to New York State DOT and New
York City DOT, 1988

Fu, Moses, and Khazem 6

View publication stats