J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.

(2013) 35:143151
DOI 10.1007/s40430-013-0011-4

TECHNICAL PAPER

Nonlinear aerostatic stability analysis of new suspension bridges

with multiple main spans
Wen-Ming Zhang Yao-Jun Ge Marc L. Levitan

Received: 22 March 2011 / Accepted: 11 August 2011 / Published online: 28 March 2013
The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2013

Abstract In order to solve the aerostatic stability prob- compared with the method without improvement in anal-
lem of long-span bridges more effectively, an upper limit ysis, and the result indicates that the accuracy and effi-
of the external iteration number is set optimally to improve ciency of the optimum iteration method are much better, so
the incremental double iteration method, and an optimum the validity and advancement of the optimum iteration
iteration method is brought forward. For new suspension method are proved.
bridges with multiple main spans, the assumption of the
spatial uniformity of wind speed is invalid due to their long Keywords Suspension bridge  Multiple main spans 
decks and high towers. Taking into account the spatial non- Aerostatic stability  The spatial non-uniformity of wind
uniformity of wind speed, a program corresponding to the speed  Optimum iteration
optimum iteration method is developed and used to analyze
the full-range aerostatic stability of the Maanshan Bridge, List of symbols
which is a long-span suspension bridge with double main b Deck width
spans in China, and the effect of wind speed spatial non- CH (a) Coefficient of drag force in wind axes
uniformity on the aerostatic stability of the bridge is CM (a) Coefficient of pitch moment in wind axes
investigated analytically. The result shows that the lowest CV (a) Coefficient of lift force in wind axes
critical wind speed of aerostatic instability is gained when e Coefficient of wind speed distributing
the distribution of wind speed is non-uniform and the non-symmetrically
spatial non-uniformity of wind speed has a considerable Em Modulus of elasticity
effect on the aerostatic stability of suspension bridges with h Vertical projected area of deck
multiple main spans. The optimum iteration method is I Serial number of current iteration
I2 Out-of-plane moments of inertia
I3 In-plane moments of inertia
Technical Editor: Marcelo Savi. Im Mass moment of inertia per unit length
Jd Torsional moments of inertia
W.-M. Zhang (&)
[Ke] Structural elastic stiffness matrix
School of Civil Engineering, Southeast University,
Nanjing 210096, Jiangsu, China [Kg] Geometrical stiffness matrix
e-mail: wenmingzhang@hotmail.com L Total length of bridge spans
L1 Width of wind distribution
Y.-J. Ge
M Mass per unit length
State Key Laboratory for Disaster Reduction in Civil
Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China Na Number of nodes subjected to the displacement-
e-mail: yaojunge@tongji.edu.cn dependent wind load
PH Drag force of wind load per unit span
M. L. Levitan
PM Pitch moment of wind load per unit span
Civil and Environmental Engineering Department,
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA PV Lift force of wind load per unit span
e-mail: levitan@lsu.edu {u} Displacement vector

123
144
V Mean wind velocity
V0 Initial wind velocity
V10 Basic wind speed at the height of 10 m from the
ground at the bridge site
x Horizontal coordinate of bridge spans
y Height from the ground
Greek symbols
DV Wind velocity increment
DVtol Prescribed tolerance of wind velocity increment
a Effective attack angle of deck
a0 Initial attack angle of wind
ek Prescribed tolerance of Euclidean norm
g Exponential coefficient of wind profile
h Torsional displacement of deck
l Wind speed spatial distribution coefficient
q Air density
m Poisson ratio
1 Introduction
As a human dream and an engineering challenge, the
structural engineering of bridging larger obstacles has
entered into a new era of crossing wide rivers and sea
straits, for example, the Yangtze River in China, the
Messina Strait in Italy, the Tsugaru Strait in Japan, the
Gibraltar Strait linking European and African Continents,
and so on. One of the most interesting challenges has been
identified as bridging capacity, in particular of suspension
bridges as a bridge type with potential longest span. Tra-
ditionally, bridging capacity is referring to a single bridge
span, for example, the latest record is the Akashi Kaikyo
Bridge with a central span of 1,991 m. The tendency of
bridging capacity development is not only invention in
making span longer, but also a further or new development
of the concept to make continuous multiple main span
schemes [10]. There are many suspension bridges with
multiple main spans in use in the world, such as the Cha-
teauneuf Bridge in France with five main spans, the
Chatillon Bridge in France with four main spans, the Ko-
naruto Bridge in Japan with double main spans, the Save
River Bridge in Mozambique with five main spans, and so
on. Under the rapid development of suspension bridges,
China launched two long-span suspension bridges with
double main spans longer than 1,000 m in 2007. One of
them is the Taizhou Bridge across the Yangtze River with
the span arrangement of 390 ? 2 9 1,080 ? 390 m, and
the other is the Maanshan Bridge over the Yangtze River
spanned as 360 ? 2 9 1,080 ? 360 m. Both of them are
under construction [9]. Also, several long-span suspension
bridge schemes with continuous multiple main spans are
being planned or designed, such as the Ho-yo Strait Bridge
123
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2013) 35:143151
in Japan with the span arrangement of 1,100 ? 2 9
3,000 ? 1,300 m [12], the Chacao Channel Bridge which
will connect the Chiloe Island and the Chile mainland with
double main spans of 1,055 ? 1,100 m, three schemes
of the Gibraltar Bridge spanned as 950 ? 3 9 3,500 ?
950 m, 2,100 ? 2 9 4,200 ? 2,100 m and 1,750 ? 2 9
5,000 ? 1,750 m, respectively, and so on.
Recent results of wind tunnel tests and researches indi-
cate that aerostatic instability of long-span cable supported
bridges is likely to occur [15, 11]. For long-span sus-
pension bridges, they deform significantly under the static
wind action due to their great flexibility, and the large
deformation changes the stiffness and the resistant forces.
On the other hand, the deformed shape of the stiffening
deck produces an increase in the value of the three com-
ponents of displacement-dependent wind loads distributed
along the deck. When the increment of the resisting forces
is less than that of static wind loads, aerostatic instability
happens [13]. Therefore, aerostatic instability is a coupling
effect of static wind loads and structural deformation.
Aerostatic instability is related to the safety of a bridge
and thus prohibitive during the design of long-span bridges.
As a result, the critical aerostatic instability wind velocity
of a bridge must exceed the design value. Cheng [47] and
Xiao [8] brought forward the incremental double iteration
method to calculate the critical aerostatic instability wind
velocity of a bridge, which is used widely. The incre-
mental means wind velocity increases with a certain pro-
portion. The internal iteration is used to calculate structural
nonlinearity, and the external iteration is used to determine
the equilibrium position of the bridge structure under a
certain wind velocity. In this method, if the increment of
wind velocity is large, the external iteration has to run
many times before it converges under a certain higher wind
velocity, and too much calculating time is cost. At the same
time, under a certain wind velocity which is greater than
the critical wind velocity of aerostatic instability, both the
external iteration and internal iteration may converge, so
the critical wind velocity cannot be calculated accurately.
If the increment of wind velocity is small, the calculating
time is also enormous, although an accurate critical wind
velocity can be gained.
In order to overcome the said shortages, an upper limit
of the external iteration number is set optimally to improve
the incremental double iteration method, and an optimum
iteration method is brought forward. Taking into account
the static wind load nonlinearity and the geometric non-
linearity, a corresponding program is developed and used
to analyze the full-range aerostatic instability of the
Maanshan Bridge, which is one of two long-span suspen-
sion bridges with double main spans in China mentioned
before, and the configuration and mechanism of the
Maanshan Bridges aerostatic instability are accordingly
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2013) 35:143151 145

discussed. The optimum iteration method is compared with 2.2 The aerostatic force
the method without improvement in analysis, and the result
indicates that the accuracy and efficiency of optimum As shown in Fig. 1, the three components of wind load per
iteration method are much better, so the validity and unit span acting on the deformed deck are drag force, lift
advancement of the optimum iteration method are proved. force and pitch moment, which can be written in wind axes
In previous aerostatic stability analysis of suspension as
bridges with single main span, the wind speeds in different PH qV 2 CH ah=2
locations were assumed to be uniform. In fact, as observed
from the field data, the wind speed varies in space [14]. For PV qV 2 CV ab=2 3
2 2
suspension bridges with double main spans or more, the PM qV CM ab =2
deck is generally very long, and wind speeds in the dif-
where PH, PV and PM are drag force, lift force and pitch
ferent horizontal locations of the deck are different. In
moment, respectively; q is the air density; V is the wind
addition, the wind speeds on the towers, cables and hangers
velocity; CH(a), CV(a) and CM(a) are the coefficients of
are remarkably different from those on the deck. Therefore,
drag force, lift force, and pitch moment in wind axes,
the wind speed becomes non-uniform in space. Zhang [15]
respectively; a is the effective attack angle of wind, which
studied effects of the spatial non-uniformity of wind speed
is the sum of the initial attack angle a0 and the torsional
on flutter of suspension bridges, but few studies related to
displacement of the deck h; b is the deck width; h is the
effects on aerostatic stability. How the spatial non-unifor-
vertical projected area of the deck.
mity of wind speed affects the aerostatic stability of long-
span suspension bridges with multiple main spans becomes
2.3 Solution procedure
a highly concerned problem, and needs to be further
investigated. In this paper, by taking the Maanshan Bridge
The stability problem of a bridge under static wind load is
as example, influence of the spatial non-uniformity of wind
the combination of the nonlinear behavior of static wind
speed on the aerostatic stability is analytically investigated,
load and the spatial stable theory of bridge structures.
and some suggestions are brought forward, which are
Based on the spatial calculation theory of member struc-
helpful for the aerostatic analysis of long-span suspension
tures, the equilibrium equation of the structural system
bridges with multiple main spans.
under wind load can be expressed as:
Ke u KgGW ufug fFPH a; PV a; PM ag 4
2 The optimum iteration method
where Ke and Kg are, respectively, the structural elastic
2.1 The spatial distribution of wind speed stiffness matrix and the geometrical stiffness matrix;
superscripts G and W mean gravity and wind loads,
Generally, wind speed changes in space, and can be respectively; {u} is the displacement vector.
expressed as As can be known from Eq. (4), not only the structural
stiffness but also the static wind loads shown in the right
V lV10 1 side of Eq. (4) are functions of structural displacement, so
iterative method must be used to solve equilibrium Eq. (4).
where V10 is the basic wind speed at the height of 10 m
The procedure of calculating critical velocity by the opti-
from the ground at the bridge site, l is the wind speed
mum iteration method can be summarized as follows:
spatial distribution coefficient, which is a function of
coordinates and can be expressed approximately as. 1. Conduct nonlinear solving under deadweight of the
"  # bridge structure to get the initial equilibrium state of
L  2x eL1  L 2  y g the bridge structure.
l 1  2
L1 10

where L is the total length of bridge spans; L1 is the width

of wind distribution; x is the horizontal coordinate of
bridge spans; y is the height from the ground; g is the
exponential coefficient of wind profile, which is dependent
on the roughness of the ground; and e is the coefficient of
wind speed distributing non-symmetrically, 0 B e B 1.
When e is equal to 0, wind speed distributes symmetrically
with mid-span. Fig. 1 Three components of wind load

123
146 J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2013) 35:143151

2. Get the torsional angle of element by averaging the
torsional displacements between left node and right
node, then calculate effective attack angle of wind and
aerostatic coefficients.
3. Compute the wind speed spatial distribution coefficient
for each element of the bridge.
4. Assume an initial wind velocity V0, an initial wind
velocity increment DV, the prescribed tolerance of
Start
Conduct nonlinear solving under deadweight
Calculate effective attack angle
and static aerodynamic coefficients
Compute the wind speed spatial distribution coefficient
Assume V0 , V, Vtol and Nmax; present V=V0
wind velocity increment DVtol and the upper limit of
external iteration number Nmax; present wind velocity
V = V0.
5. Under present wind velocity V, solve the global
equilibrium Eq. (4) to get the displacement {u} by
NewtonRaphson method (internal iteration).
6. Get the torsional angle of element from the displace-
ment vector {u} by averaging the torsional displace-
ments between left node and right node, then calculate
effective attack angle of wind and aerostatic
coefficients.
7. Check if the Euclidean norm of aerostatic coefficients
is less than the prescribed tolerance. The Euclidean
norm is written as:
(P N )
2 1=2
j1 Ck ai  Ck ai1 
a
P Na 2
 ek 5
j1 Ck ai1 
where Na is the number of nodes subjected to the
displacement-dependent wind load; i is the serial
number of current iteration; ek is the prescribed toler-
ance, which can be assumed as 0.005.

Number of outer iteration n=0

Calculate wind load of the structure under V
Solve the global equilibrium to get the
displacement by Newton-Raphson method
Calculate Euclidean norms of
static aerodynamic coefficients
Euclidean norms< Yes
k
No
8. If Eq. (5) is not satisfied, repeat steps (5)(7) until it is
satisfied, and this is external iteration. If the number of
external iteration is equal to the upper limit Nmax,
which means it is hard to converge under present wind
velocity, get back to the equilibrium state of previous
wind velocity and shorten the wind velocity increment,
DV = DV/2, then go back to step (5) and recalculate.
If the difference between two successive wind veloc-
ities is less than prescribed tolerance, then stop.
9. If Eq. (5) is satisfied, output result and add wind
velocity according to scheduled change in wind
velocity length, V = V ? DV, and repeat steps (5)(9).
10. Draw the curve of structural displacement changing
with wind velocity, and determine the critical wind
velocity accordingly.

n=n+1 Based on the said steps, a program is developed, and the

flow chart of the program is shown in Fig. 2.
No
n =Nmax
Yes
3 Description of the example bridge

Get back to the state of previous wind velocity The Maanshan suspension bridge over Yangtze River is in
Anhui Province of China. This bridge with double main
V=V/2 spans is spanned as 360 ? 2 9 1,080 ? 360 m in Fig. 3.
All three towers are 176 m high. The height of the middle
Yes tower above the deck is 128 m; the height of each side
End V<Vtol
tower above the deck is 143 m symmetrically. The deck
No cross-section (Fig. 4) is an aerodynamically shaped closed
V=V+ V box steel deck 38.5 m wide and 3.5 m high. The two cables
and all hangers are made of high-tensile galvanized parallel
Fig. 2 Flow chart of the program wire bundles. The distance between the two cables is 35 m.

123
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2013) 35:143151 147

Fig. 3 Elevation of the

Maanshan Bridge (unit: m)

Fig. 4 Cross-section of the

deck of the Maanshan Bridge
(unit: mm)

Table 1 Section geometrical and material features of main members -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
2.5 2.5
Main Jd I2 I3 Im M (t/ Em (MPa) m

Static aerodynamic coefficients

2.0 CH 2.0
member (m4) (m4) (m4) (t m2/ m)
m) CV
1.5 1.5
10CM
5
Deck 9.10 207.04 3.22 2,590 21.39 2.01 9 10 0.3 1.0 1.0
Cable 2.40 2.01 9 105
0.5 0.5
Hanger 0.04 2.01 9 105
0.0 0.0
Jd Torsional moments of inertia, I2 out-of-plane moments of inertia, I3
in-plane moments of inertia, Im mass moment of inertia per unit -0.5 -0.5
length, M mass per unit length, Em modulus of elasticity, m Poisson
-1.0 -1.0
ratio
-1.5 -1.5
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
Attack angle (deg)
Fig. 6 Aerostatic coefficients of the deck

geometric nonlinearity due to cable sag. The bridge deck is

Fig. 5 Finite element model of Maanshan Bridge
represented by a single beam and the cross-section prop-
erties of the bridge deck are assigned to the beam as
equivalent properties. The connections between bridge
components and the supports of the bridge are properly
modeled. The aerostatic coefficients of the deck are
obtained from the sectional model test in wind tunnel as
shown in Fig. 6.

The spacing between two adjacent hangers is 16.0 m.

Section material and geometrical features of main members
are indicated in Table 1. The deck is fixed with middle
tower. There are two one-way longitudinal movable sup-
ports under the deck on the lower crossbeam of each side
tower; lateral wind-resistant supports are set between the
deck and the columns of the side towers.
As shown in Fig. 5, a three-dimensional finite element
model is established for the Maanshan suspension bridge.
Three-dimensional beam elements are used to model the
three bridge towers. The cables and suspenders are mod-
eled by three-dimensional link element accounting for
4 Aerostatic stability analysis
The attack angle of strong wind in atmospheric boundary
layer varies a little within -3 to 3. In the following
analysis, three initial attack angles, -3, 0 and 3, are
selected. Taking the bridge structure only subjected to dead
load as the initial state, full-range nonlinear aerostatic
stability of the Maanshan Bridge is computed using the
program in this paper. In the following, the wind speed
shown in tables and figures is the maximum values along
the deck at the mean elevation of the deck.

123
148 J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2013) 35:143151

4.1 Critical wind speed
The critical wind velocities of seven cases with wind speed
varying in space are summarized in Table 2. The [ in
Table 2 means the critical wind velocity is greater than a
certain wind velocity, at which the effective attack angle of
a certain deck element is beyond the range of -12 to 12
for the first time. Because the aerostatic coefficients are not
available beyond the attack angle range of -12 to 12, the
program stops automatically at the wind velocity following
the [.
As can be seen in Table 2, the lowest critical wind
velocity 125 m/s is obtained in case (6) at a0 = 08, which is
much greater than the allowable wind velocity 47.16 m/s,
so the aerostatic stability performance of the Maanshan
Bridge is very good. Also, the initial attack angle a0 has a
considerable effect on the aerostatic stability of the
Maanshan Bridge, and almost the lowest critical wind
velocity of every case is obtained at a0 = 08 except case (2).
In the cases of wind speed distributing symmetrically,
the critical wind velocities in the case of wind speed dis-
tributing uniformly are less than those in the cases of wind
speed distributing non-uniformly. The reason is that the
wind speed spatial distribution coefficient and therefore the
aerostatic load acting on the bridge in cases (2)(4) are
reduced. Table 2 also indicates that, the critical wind
velocity under the same initial attack angle of 0 or ?3
decrease as the wind distribution width increases in cases
(2)(4), because the effect of wind speed non-uniformity
on the aerostatic behavior is gradually weakened as the
wind distribution width increases. Therefore, the influence
of the wind distribution width on the aerostatic stability of
the Maanshan Bridge is considerable.
Under the same initial attack angle of 0 or ?3, critical
wind velocities in the cases of wind speed distributing
asymmetrically are less than those in the cases of wind
speed distributing symmetrically. The reason is that the
maximum wind speed on the deck in the cases of wind
speed distributing symmetrically is at the location of
middle tower, where the stiffness is greater than other
Table 2 Critical wind velocities (m/s)
Distribution Cases a0 = -38 a0 = 08 a0 = ?38
of wind
Symmetric (1) Uniform [180 145.3 148.8
(2) L1 = L, e = 0 [200 [205.0 183.3
(3) L1 = 2L, e = 0 [190 155.0 157.5
(4) L1 = 3L, e = 0 [200 148.1 152.7
Asymmetric (5) L1 = 3L, e = 1/8 [200 128.8 140.0
(6) L1 = 3L, e = [200 125.0 135.0
(7) L1 = 3L, e = 1/2 [170 127.5 139.4
locations on the deck and the effect of the maximum wind
speed is reduced. In the cases of wind speed distributing
asymmetrically, the locations of the maximum wind speed
on the deck at e = 1/8, e = 1/4 and e = 1/2 are the
quarter-point of right span, the midpoint of right span and
the right side tower, respectively, wherein the midpoint of
right span has the lowest stiffness, so the lowest critical
wind velocity in cases (5)(7) is obtained at e = 1/4.
4.2 Configuration of aerostatic instability
The displacement behaviors at midpoint of either span
under initial attack angles of 0 and ?3 in case (1) are
shown in Fig. 7. As found in Fig. 7, the torsional and
vertical displacement for initial attack angle ?3 increase
with wind velocity, whereas those for initial attack angle 0
decrease with wind velocity. This special phenomenon can
be explained using the aerostatic coefficients. In the initial
state of the bridge structure, the torsional displacement of
the deck is 0, so the effective attack angles corresponding
to the initial attack angle 0 and ?3 are 0 and ?3,
respectively. As can be seen in Fig. 6, in the total course of
the effective attack angle changing with wind velocity, the
coefficients of lift force and pitch moment for the initial
attack angle ?3 are positive, but those for the initial attack
angle 0 are negative. In addition, the coefficients of drag
force for the initial attack angle 0 and ?3 are positive, so
the lateral displacements for both initial attack angles
increase with wind speed.
In the cases of wind speed distributing asymmetrically,
the deformation of the suspension bridge with double main
spans is asymmetric. As an example, the displacement
behaviors at the midpoint of each span under the initial
attack angles of 0 and ?3 in case (6) are shown in Fig. 8.
As can be seen in Fig. 8, the lateral displacement of
right span is greater than that of left span under a same
wind speed. The reason is that the wind speeds of right
span are greater than those of left span. Figure 8 also
indicates that, with the increase of wind speed, the torsional
or vertical displacements of both spans develop with a
generally same trend when wind speed is low. However,
the difference in the torsional or vertical displacements
between both spans increases with wind speed. When wind
speed approaches the critical value, the trend of the tor-
sional or vertical displacement in left span is opposite to
that of right span due to the drag effect of two main cables.
As shown in Figs. 7 and 8, the lateral, vertical and
torsional displacements of the deck increase or decrease
nonlinearly with wind speed. At the critical wind velocity,
the displacements diverge, which means the bridge struc-
ture goes into instability under the static wind load and the
dead load. As we can know from observing the full course
of the aerostatic instability of the bridge, the posture of the

123
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2013) 35:143151 149

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 bridge changes from the initial equilibrium state as wind
6 6 velocity increases, and the torsional deformation causes the
change of the effective attack angles. Therefore, the static
4 a0 0 4
wind load acting on the bridge structure develops nonlin-
a0 3 early with wind velocity, and accordingly, nonlinear
Torsional angle(deg)

2 2
characteristics of various structural deformations are pre-
sented in different degrees with wind velocity. In summary,
0 0
the aerostatic instability of a suspension bridge with double
-2 -2 main spans is the result of the three components of wind
load acting together, and the configuration of aerostatic
-4 -4 instability is spatial bending-torsional coupling buckling.
In addition, the wind velocity increment decreases as
-6 -6 wind velocity increases, as shown in Figs. 7 and 8. This is
mainly because the external iteration is increasingly diffi-
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 cult to converge as wind velocity and structural deforma-
Wind speed (m/s) tion increase.

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

6 6
5 The validity and advancement of the method
a0 0
In order to be compared with the said calculation using
Vertical displacement (m)

4 4
a0 3 the optimum iteration method and prove the validity and
2 2 advancement of the optimum iteration method proposed
in this paper, a calculation not using the optimum itera-
0 0
tion method is conducted with an initial attack angle ?3
-2 -2 and a changeless wind velocity increment 10 m/s in the
case of L1 = 3L and e = 1/4. In the calculation, the
-4 -4 program stopped at wind velocity 150 m/s because the
internal iteration diverged. The result indicates that
-6 -6
the torsional displacement at the midpoint of right span is
-8 -8 2.8 and 75.2, respectively, at wind velocity 130 and
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 140 m/s. Because 75.2 is a huge torsional displacement,
Wind speed (m/s) the critical wind velocity only can be determined between
130 and 140 m/s. In order to obtain the accurate critical
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 wind velocity, the program is needed to be modified as:
8 8 (1) the wind velocity increment changes into 1 m/s when
7 7 wind velocity is above 130 m/s; and (2) the program stops
a0 0 when wind velocity is equal to or above 140 m/s. The
Lateral displacement (m)

6 6
a0 3 critical wind velocity is gained in the recalculation as
5 5 135 m/s.
4 4 In the calculation using the optimum iteration method,
the initial wind velocity increment is also 10 m/s. The
3 3 upper limit of external iteration is 5, and the program is set
2 2 to stop when the difference between two successive wind
velocities is less than 0.05 m/s. The result (see Fig. 8)
1 1
indicates that the wind velocity increment was adjusted as
0 0 5 m/s automatically when wind velocity was above 120 m/
-1 -1 s, then it changed into 1.25 m/s when wind velocity was
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 greater than 133.75 m/s, and the program stopped at wind
Wind speed (m/s) velocity 135.04 m/s because the increment of two succes-
sive wind velocities was \0.05 m/s. So the critical wind
Fig. 7 The displacement behaviors at midpoint in case (1) velocity 135.04 m/s is gained just using one calculation.

123
150 J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2013) 35:143151

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

4.5 4.5
2 2
4.0 4.0
1 1 3.5
3.5 a0=+3
Torsional angle (deg)

Torsional angle (deg)

0 0 3.0 Left span 3.0
Right span
-1 -1 2.5 2.5

-2 a0=0 -2 2.0 2.0

Left span 1.5 1.5
-3 -3
Right span 1.0
1.0
-4 -4
0.5 0.5
-5 -5 0.0 0.0
-6 -6 -0.5 -0.5
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Wind speed (m/s) Wind speed (m/s)

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

6 6 6 6

4 4 5 5
Vertical displacement (m)

2 2 Vertical displacement (m) 4 a0=+3 4

Left span
0 0 3 3
Right span
-2 -2 2 2
-4 a0=0 -4
Left span 1 1
-6 Right span -6
0 0
-8 -8
-1 -1
-10 -10
-2 -2
-12 -12
-3 -3
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Wind speed (m/s) Wind speed (m/s)

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

4.5 4.5
4.0 4.0 5 5
3.5 3.5
Lateral displacement (m)

Lateral displacement (m)

a0=0 a0=+3
4 4
3.0 Left span 3.0 Left span
Right span Right span
2.5 2.5 3 3
2.0 2.0
1.5 1.5 2 2
1.0 1.0
1 1
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.0 0 0
-0.5 -0.5
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Wind speed (m/s) Wind speed (m/s)

Fig. 8 The displacement behaviors at midpoint of each span in case (6)

123
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2013) 35:143151
In summary, in the calculation not using the optimum
iteration method, at least two calculations are needed by
modifying the program artificially. However, in the cal-
culation using the optimum iteration method, just one
calculation is needed. Therefore, the optimum iteration
method is more effective in solving aerostatic stability
problem. In addition, the initial wind velocity increment is
suggested in the range from 10 to 20 m/s, and the upper
limit of external iteration is suggested as 4 or 5.
6 Conclusion
Taking into account the spatial non-uniformity of wind
speed, the optimum iteration method is brought forward to
solve the aerostatic stability problem of suspension bridges
with multiple main spans. By taking the Maanshan Bridge
over the Yangtze River as example, effect of wind speed
spatial non-uniformity on the aerostatic stability of the
bridge is investigated analytically, and the configuration
and mechanism of aerostatic instability of the bridge are
accordingly discussed. The concluding remarks can be
summarized as follows:
1. The initial attack angle of wind has a considerable
effect on the critical wind velocity of aerostatic
instability.
2. The lowest critical wind velocity of aerostatic insta-
bility is not obtained when wind speed is uniform, but
in a case of wind speed distributing asymmetrically.
3. The effect of wind speed spatial non-uniformity on
aerostatic stability is remarkable and bridge engineers
should pay more attention to it. Actually, the spatial
distribution of wind speed at the bridge site can be
measured by field tests or wind tunnel tests if needed.
4. Aerostatic instability of is the result of the three
components of wind load acting together, and the
configuration of aerostatic instability is spatial bend-
ing-torsional coupling buckling.
5. The validity and advancement of the optimum iteration
method are proved, and it can solve the aerostatic
stability problem more effectively.
Acknowledgments The work described in this paper is partially
supported by the NSFC under the Grant 51208104, a project supported
151
by the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (Grant No.
BK2012344), the RFDP under the Grant 20120092120018, and a
project funded by the Priority Academic Program Development of
Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD), which are gratefully
acknowledged.
References
1. Boonyapinyo V, Lauhatanon Y, Lukkunaprasit P (2006) Non-
linear aerostatic stability analysis of suspension bridges. Eng
Struct 28:793803
2. Boonyapinyo V, Miyata T, Yamada H (1999) Advanced aero-
dynamic analysis of suspension bridges by state-space approach.
J. Struct. Eng ASCE 125:13571366
3. Boonyapinyo V, Yamada H, Miyata T (1994) Wind-induced
nonlinear lateral-torsional buckling of cable-stayed bridges.
J. Struct. Eng., ASCE 120:486506
4. Cheng J, Jiang JJ, Xiao RC (2003) Aerostatic stability analysis of
suspension bridges under parametric uncertainty. Eng Struct
25:16751684
5. Cheng J, Xiao RC, Xiang HF, Jiang JJ (2003) NASAB: a finite
element software for the nonlinear aerostatic stability analysis of
cable-supported bridges. Adv Eng Softw 34:287296
6. Cheng J, Jiang JJ, Xiao RC, Xiang HF (2002) Advanced aero-
static stability analysis of cable-stayed bridges using finite-ele-
ment method. Comput Struct 80:11451158
7. Cheng J, Jiang JJ, Xiao RC, Xiang HF (2002) Nonlinear aero-
static stability analysis of Jiang Yin suspension bridge. Eng Struct
24:773781
8. Xiao RC, Cheng J (2004) Advanced aerostatic stability analysis
of suspension bridges. Wind Struct 7:5570
9. Ge YJ, Xiang HF (2008) Bridging capacity innovations on cable-
supported bridges. In: Proceedings of the IABMAS Conference,
Seoul, Korea, pp 93105
10. Ge YJ, Xu LS, Zhang WM, Zhou ZY (2009) Dynamic and
aerodynamic characteristics of new suspension bridges with
double main spans. In: Seventh Asia-Pacific conference on wind
engineering, Taipei, Taiwan, pp 177180
11. Fang MS, Xiang HF, Xiao RC (2000) Nonlinear aerostatic sta-
bility theory of large-span cable-stayed bridges. China Civil Eng.
J 33:7379 (in Chinese)
12. Manabu I (2008) 21st century super long span bridges in Japan.
Documents of ChinaJapan Workshop on the Technologies of
Large Span Bridges, pp 145152
13. Simiu E, Scanlan RH (1996) Wind effects on structures: funda-
mentals and applications to design, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York
14. Xie JM, Xiang HF (1985) Three flutter analysis for bridges by
state-space approach. J Tongji Univ 3:113 (in Chinese)
15. Zhang XJ (2007) Influence of some factors on the aerodynamic
behavior of long-span suspension bridges. J Wind Eng Ind Aer-
odyn 95:149164
123