Zheng, P and Dai, G (2013) A comparative study on static properties of a three-main-truss and three-cable-plane cable-stayed bridge. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 11(2), pp. 207-220. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
Purpose: This paper aims to obtain the further and overall generation about the static characteristics of the structure for the better application of the structure. Design/methodology/approach: Through nonlinear finite element simulation, serials of comparative analyses are performed on this structure and other three assumed structures, which illustrate the effect of the main part of the structure on the structural static properties. Meanwhile, adopting the first order method, spatial cable force optimization makes the structural mechanic more rational. Findings: Under same level stress, this three-main-truss and three-cable-plane bridge could save almost 38.8 percent vertical chords materials consumption at least. In contrast, this bridge has a lower lateral torsional stiffness, considering the key to raise the lateral and torsional stiffness is enhancing axial stiffness of plane bracing, the suitable plane bracing members area is twice as the original area. After rational optimization, the cable tension ratio between the mid-cable plane and the two side-cable planes ranges from 1.09 to 1.14. Originality/value: The work in this paper of the comparative analysis could give other engineers a way to a deep analysis method for the structural analysis, especially in civil engineering. The conclusions would provide other designers some applied advice.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architectural design; numerical methods; simulation |
| Index terms: | engineer, designer, comparative study, structural analysis, comparative analysis, methodology, consumption, architectural design |
| Subjects: | profession, research design and methodology, consumer economics, data analysis and analytics, design practice, structural engineering, research methods |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here