Honshu Shikoku Bridges

Wind Resistant Design Code

(2001)

August 2001

Honshu Shikoku Bridge Authority

 Wind Resistant Design Standard for Honshu-Shikoku Bridges
(2001)

Preface

This “Design Standard (2001)” is a summary of experiences of actual wind resistant design
conducted for completed stage as well as erection stage of the Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge
(completed in 1998 with a main span of 1991 m) , Tatara Bridge (in 1999, 890 m) and
Kurushima-Kaikyo Bridges (in 1999, 3 bridges with the maximum span of 1020 m), which
are last long-span bridges in the Honshu-Shikoku Bridge (herein after, referred as HSB)
project. Though each bridge was designed by individual code, not by this standard which did
not exist at the time of design, this standard is newly formed up in shape of the design code
on basis of each original code as well as reflection and investigation that were
simultaneously and subsequently carried out. In addition, some relaxations are added here
in order to let this standard be applicable to smaller or medium span bridges that do not
necessarily require broad and detailed investigation as these long-span bridges had needed,
because this standard is only one wind resistant design code available in Japan other than
“Wind Resistant Design Manual for Highway Bridges”, which is published by Japan Road
Association in 1991 and is basically to be applied to the bridges having shorter span than
200 m.
The other reasons that this is fixed in a shape of design code are;
・In many long-span bridge projects including HSB, practical design has been conducted
with a draft code; a final code is established afterward on basis of experience and
reflection of the completed structure, and this will become a heritage to future projects,
and
・As for achievement of HSB project, what shall be handed over to next generation is
judged not to be “Report on wind resistant design of Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge and so on” ,
but to be a design code that can be used in future.
If we are looking back history of wind resistant design of HSB as being shown in Table-1,
honest investigation began in 1963 by Sub-committee for Wind Resistant Design of HSB,
which was established under Technical Advisory Committee for HSB founded in 1961 by
Japan Society of Civil Engineers. The first outcome was “Guideline for Wind Resistant
Design of HSB (1964)”, which was a supplementary to the Report on Technical Feasibility
Study of HSB written by the advisory committee. After a few times of revisions, “HSB
Standard for Wind Resistant Design (1976)” was established, by which practical design up
to the Seto-Ohashi Bridges completed in 1988 (the maximum span= 1100 m) was carried
out with help of latest knowledge at that time as well.
 As for the Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge which should be the longest bridge in HSB project and
also in the world, public opinion to commence the construction work became strong in 1980’s
during which change of the bridge from a highway-railway combined bridge to
highway-only bridge was also proposed. This fact meant that the main span length was
preferably requested to enlarge from previous 1780 m to around 2000 m in order to ease
technical difficulty of Awaji-side main pier and to secure more distance from the pier to edge
of the Akashi-Kaikyo Waterway. What enabled this request of span enlargement was
superior wind-proofness of the bridge, accordingly, a special working group whose task was
to re-evaluate current design code and to seek ways for span enlargement was organized
under the Committee for Wind Resistant Design of HSB which had given academic support
to the project for decades, and the group continued broad and in-depth investigation
regarding to aerodynamic and structural characteristics of such a long-span suspension
bridge from 1982 to 1985. And, the HSBA finally decided the bridge to have span of 960m +
1990m + 960m based on the outcome from the group as well as other technical
achievements relating undersea topography, geology, study on design and construction
method and so on. Because this new scheme had longer span compared with previous
long-span HSB and had very flexible structure, importance of wind resistant design was
strongly pointed out and “Guideline of Wind Resistant Design for the Akashi-Kaikyo
Bridge (1990)”, whose applicable scope was restricted to the Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge only, was
thus established.
In addition, necessity to do 3-dimensional wind tunnel test with an aeroelastic full-bridge
model, not 2-dimensional test with spring-supported rigid model widely conducted in
previous bridges, was also recognized for securing accuracy as well as reliability of wind
resistant design of such a long-span bridge, and this recognition led construction of a new
and large-scale wind tunnel inside the precincts of the Public Works Research Institute, the
Ministry of Construction. This wind tunnel has been in operation since 1991. In order to
evaluate and to examine test results with this large-scale wind tunnel, amendments were
added to the test results based on various numerical wind-response analysis (flutter
analysis and gust response analysis), which had been studied and developed at that time. At
the same time, analysis with somewhat distorted similarity conditions, which were
unavoidable in large-scale wind tunnel test with a full-bridge model, were done, and
comparison of both results were also carried out in order to confirm reliability of the analysis
and to raise its effectiveness as if the large-scale wind tunnel test and numerical analysis
were treated as both wheels of an axle.
The bridges in HSB that were not given go-sign at the time of commencement of con
struction of the Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge were Shin-Onomichi Bridge, Tatara Bridge,
and First to Third Kurushima-Kaikyo Bridges, all which belong to Onomichi-Imabari
Route. So, a new exclusive design code: “Guideline of Wind Resistant Design for Bridges in
Onomichi-Imabari Route (1994)” was formed on basis of accumulated experiences since
1976, latest academic knowledge and availability of the large-scale wind tunnel. One more
reason to need this new code is that terrain surrounding these bridges is rather large and
complicated, which fact means that incoming wind to the bridges might be distorted. For
Tatara Bridge and Second Kurushima-Kaikyo Bridge among these, synthetic study on
wind-resistivity was conducted on basis of aeroelastic full-bridge model wind tunnel tests
with and without surrounding terrain models as well as numerical analysis
Table-1 summarizes the history of design standards and actual construction of the
bridges, and Table–2 shows characteristics of each code. Applicable bridges of this standard
(2001) for the moment has been considered as suspension bridges having longer span than
1000 m approximately and cable-stayed bridges longer than around 500 m, but some
relaxation is added to let applicability of this standard be widened to smaller span bridges
as being mentioned in the beginning of this preface.
In order to implement wind tunnel tests which are needed by this wind resistant design
standard, Guidelines of Wind Tunnel Test for Honshu-Shikoku Bridges(2001) and for
Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge(1990) have been separately established. We, therefore, sincerely hope
these design standard and two guidelines be useful for future long-span bridge projects.
Finally, we want to add some comments. Though use of SI unit system has been
mandatory in Japan since October 1999, the unit system utilized in this long lasting activity
was the gravitational one, and thus the gravitational unit system is primarily used and the
SI unit is added in square bracket. When necessarily, please convert by the following values.
1 tf = 9.8 KN
1kgf = 9.8 N
1 °= 0.017 radian
And, original Standard (2001) written in Japanese are provided with in-depth explanations
corresponding to each provision, but provisions only are translated this time. So, if you have
any questions, please contact to Honshu-Shikoku Bridge Authority.

August, 2001
 Table-１ History of wind resistant design codes and construction of HBS

Construction and codes

Year Items
① ② ③
1961 Foundation of JSCE’s advisory committee
1962
1963 Foundation of Task Committee for wind resistant design
1964 Guideline for wind resistant design (1964)
1965
1966
1967 Guideline of wind resistant design (1967)
1968
1969
1970 Foundation of Honshu-Shikoku Bridge Authority
1971
1972 Wind resistant design standard(1972)
1973
1974
1975 Wind resistant design standard(1975)
1976 Wind resistant design standard(1976)-------- ①

Ohmishima
1977
1978

Innoshima
1979

Ohnaruto
1980
1981
1982

Hakata・Ohshima
1983

Seto
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
Ikuchi
1989

Akashi-Kaikyo
1990 Guideline of wind resistant design for the Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge --------- ②

Kurushima-Kaikyou
1991 Completion of large boundary layer wind tunnel facility
1992
1993

Tatara
1994 Guideline of wind resistant design for Onomichi-Imabari Route (1994) - ③
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001 Honshu-Shikoku Bridges Standard forWind Resistant Design (2001)
 Table-2 Characteristics of wind resistant design codes for HSB
Name of code Characteristics
(1) Guideline(1964) ① Setting basic wind characteristics such as vertical profile of mean speed, etc
② Proposing way to decide basic wind speed based on recurrent interval
③ Setting Verification wind speed for divergent type vibration as 1.2Vd
④ Clear request of wind tunnel test regarding to divergent type vibration
⑤ Setting general matters about wind tunnel testing

(2) Guideline(1967) ① Basic wind speed = 50 and 45 m/s for Naruto-Straits and other channels,
respectively
② Recurrent interval = 100 or 150 years
③ For construction stage, recurrent interval = 30 years
④ Introducing modification factor for design wind load by turbulent scale and
structural dimension
⑤ Attack angle = ±5°and ±10°depending on wind speed

(3) Standard(1972) ① Clarifying procedure of wind resistant design

② Setting basic wind speed for 4 straits
③ Recurrent interval = 150 years for completed structure
④ Change Verification wind speed to 1.3Vd
⑤ Introducing modification factor for design wind load by gust response
⑥ Establishing wind tunnel test guideline and setting allowable error of test
⑦ Attack angle = ±7°

(4) Standard(1975) ① Setting basic wind speed for 5 straits

② Change of vertical profile of mean wind speed
③ Revising increase factor of allowable stress against storm
④ Revision of Verification wind speed to 1.2Vd
⑤ Setting wind load for erection stage
⑥ Adding tower oscillatory test to wind tunnel test guideline(73)

(5) Standard(1976) ① Modifying method to calculate wind load for harmonizing with separately
established Superstructure Design Standard of HSB
② Bridges up to Seto-Ohashi were designed mainly with this standard.
② Adding methods of model fabrication and display of test result to wind
tunnel test guideline, and thus establishing new version(80) .

(6) Guideline for ① Exclusively established for Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge

② Basic wind speed = 46 m/s
Akashi-Kaikyo ③ Clarifying natural wind characteristics
Br(1990) ④ Consideration of gust response is changed from wind speed to wind load.
⑤ Separation of structural damping into deflection and torsional vibration
⑥ Clear request of verification on gust response
⑦ Attack angle = ±3°
⑧ Consideration of fluctuation of wind speed to Verification wind speed
⑨Adding taut-strip model test and tower test for complete stage to
guideline(80
⑩ Showing method for gust response analysis

① Exclusively established for bridges to be constructed in the route

② Adding full-bridge model wind tunnel test to standard design procedure
(7) Guideline for
③ Clarifying natural wind characteristics for Onomichi channel
Onomichi-Imabari
④ Determination of wind load modification factors based on approximately final
Route (1994)
design result (thus, verification: ⑥ of 6) is not needed)
⑤ Adding rain-vibration to items to be verified
 Wind Resistant Design Standard
for Honshu-Shikoku Bridges (2001)
 WIND RESISTANT DESIGN STANDARD FOR
HONSHU-SHIKOKU BRIDGES (2001)

１ General Rule

1.1 Scope
This standard shall be applied for wind resistant design of long-span bridges such as
the Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge, Tatara Bridge, Kurushima-Kaikyo Bridge and so on.

1.2 Definitions and notations

1.2.1 Definition
Terminology used in this standard is defined as the following.
(1) Relating to wind speed
① Basic wind speed
It is a common wind speed used for design of all parts of a certain bridge, and is
defined as 10-minute averaged speed at 10 m above the water level on the site.
② Design wind speed
It is a fundamental wind speed by which wind load intensity is to be decided or
aerodynamic stability of the bridge is to be checked, and is to be determined by
multiplying the basic wind speed by a modification factor for elevation of the structure.
③ Critical wind speed
It is the lowest wind speed at which divergent type of vibration such as flutter etc. is
observed to begins.
④ Verification wind speed
It is a wind speed by which onset of divergent type of vibration is to be checked. When
the critical wind speed is higher than the verification wind speed, the structure is
judged as safe.
(2) Relating to wind load and aerodynamic force
① Design wind load
It is wind force (drag component) acting to a bridge or its members in the
longitudinal direction or the transverse direction of the bridge, and is to be calculated
with the design wind speed and modification factors for wind load.
② Steady wind force
It is time-averaged force acting on a body.
③ Fluctuating wind force
It is time-varying wind force that is caused by turbulence of the wind.
④ Unsteady aerodynamic force
It is time-varying aerodynamic force acting on an oscillating body, and its fluctuation is
accompanied with movement of the body.
(3) Relating to wind characteristics
① Wind direction
It is a direction in the horizontal plane from which the wind comes.
② Azimuth angle
It is incoming angle of the wind in the horizontal plane measured from the
perpendicular direction of a bridge.
③ Inclination angle
It is incoming angle of the wind in the vertical plane measured from the horizontal
axis. When the wind goes upward, it is regarded as positive.
④ Attack angle
It is incoming angle of the wind measured from the basic axis of the deck in the
vertical plane that is perpendicular to the bridge direction. When the deck is in
horizontal plane, the attack angle becomes equal to the inclination angle, but both
angles differ if the deck has crossfall or the deck is statically twisted. The attack angle
is treated as positive when the wind goes upward.
⑤ Uniform flow
It is a constant wind whose speed does not change in time and space domain, and is
one of the wind conditions to be used in design.
⑥ Turbulent flow
It is a fluctuating wind whose speed changes in time and space domain.
(4) Relating to structure
① Structural damping
It is consuming effect of the structure on oscillation energy, and is expressed with
logarithmic decrement in terms of the oscillatory amplitude.
② Basic sea level
It is a datum plane from which the height of a structural part is measured, and the
mean sea level of the Tokyo Bay (T.P.) shall be ±0.
1.2.2 Notations
Notations used in this standard are defined as the following.
① U ,V ,W Component of the averaged wind speed in the main flow direction, the
horizontal direction and the vertical direction, respectively.
② u , v, w Comp onent of the fluctuating wind speed in the main flow direction,
the horizontal direction and the vertical direction, respectively.
③ β Azimuth angle
④ U 10 Basic wind speed
⑤ Uz Design wind speed
⑥ Pd Design wind load
⑦ ρ Density of the air
⑧ Cd Drag coefficient
⑨ An Projection area
⑩ µ1 Modification factor for the design wind speed by the height of
structure
⑪ µ2 Modification factor for the design wind load acting on the cable,
suspenders and suspended deck.
⑫ µ3 Modification factor for the design wind load acting on the tower.
⑬ µF Modification factor for the verification wind speed of divergent type
vibrations.

2 Procedure of Wind Resistant Design

The wind resistant design shall be conducted in accordance with the following steps
(Figure-2.1). However, the steps of ③ and ④ can be omitted when a bridge having
medium span length and widely used structural type is designed.
① Rough cross section of the deck or tower is obtained through static design.
② Excellent cross section in terms of aerodynamic behavior is selected through
spring-supported model wind tunnel test for the deck and three-dimensional
aeroelastic model wind tunnel test for the tower. The aerostatic coefficients of the
selected cross section are examined.
③ Check of static instability is conducted, and
④ Precise investigation about divergent type of vibration, gust response and
vortex-induced oscillation is carried out through wind tunnel test (with
three-dimensional aeroelastic model) and dynamic analysis (gust response analysis
and flutter analysis).
 Figure-2.1 Actually employed procedure for wind resistant design of
Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge, Tatara Bridge and Kurushima Bridges

Start

Conversion from basic wind speed to design wind speed

Selection of cross section

Estimation of drag coefficient

Determination of wind load

Static design
No
No
Satisfy requirements ?
Possible to satisfy by
change of detail? Yes
Yes
Wind tunnel test:
Deck by mainly spring supported model,
Tower by aeroelastic model

No
Satisfy requirements ?
Yes
Measurement of aerostatic coefficients

Re-evaluation of wind load

Re-evaluation of static stress and deformation

No
Satisfy requirements ? ENＤ
Yes
Verification of static instability Depending on scale and structural type,
up to here is enough
No
Satisfy requirements ?

Yes
Measurement of unsteady aerodynamic coefficients

Dynamic verification: Including verification of final cross

complete stage, erection stage, influence by terrain section and stabilizing measures
Gust response analysis
Flutter analysis,
Full aeroelastic model wind tunnel test

No
Satisfy requirements ?

Yes
End
 3 Basic Characteristics of Wind to be considered in Design

3.1 Basic wind speed

The basic wind speed U 10 used in design shall be as shown in Table-3.1.1.

Table-3.1.1 Basic wind speed

Bridge Basic wind speed (m/s)
Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge 46
Kurushima-Kaikyo Bridge 40
Tatara Bridge 37

3.2 Design wind speed

The design wind speed U z for every part of the structure shall be determined in accordance
with Formula-3.2.1, in which the basic wind speed U 10 is to be multiplied by the modification
factor µ1 that is decided by the reference height of the structural part.
U z = µ1 ⋅ U 10 (3.2.1)
The modification factor µ1 shall be decided from Formula-3.2.2, and be round off to two
decimal places.
µ1 = (Z 10)α (3.2.2)
Where, the exponent α shall be in accordance with Table-3.2.1, and the reference height
of the structure is to be a vertical distance from the basic sea level and is as
given in Table-3.2.2 .

Table-3.2.1 Exponent for power law of vertical profile of wind speed

Bridge Exponent
Akashi -Kaikyo Bridge 1/8
Kurushima-Kaikyo Bridge
1/7
Tatara Bridge

Table-3.2.2 Way of determination of basic reference height of structure

Structural part Basic reference height Z (m)
Averaged height of stiffening or main girder at the center
Suspended structure
span
Mean value of the height for suspended structure and
Cable and suspender
averaged height of tower top
Tower 65% of tower height
3.3 Turbulent characteristics of wind
(1) For check of divergent type vibration
When safety of the suspended structure against divergent type vibration is being
checked, the turbulent intensity of I u = 0.10 and I w = 0.05 for the main flow direction and
the vertical direction, respectively, shall be considered.
(2) For check of vortex-induced oscillation
When safety against vortex-induced oscillation is being checked, the turbulent
intensity of I u = 0.05 and I w = 0.025 for the main flow direction and the vertical direction,
respectively, shall be considered.
(3) For check of gust response
When safety against gust response is being checked, the following characteristics
shall be considered.
① Component along main flow
The power spectrum density of fluctuating wind speed along the main flow
S u ( f ) shall be as shown by Formula-3.3.1.

−5 6
f ⋅ Su ( f ) f   f  
2
= 0.475 ⋅ 1 +    (3.3.1)
u2 f ′   f ′ 
 

Where, f is a frequency, and f ′ is to be f ′ = 0.635 ⋅ Z −0.75 .

The vertical profile of turbulent intensity along the main flow I u (Z ) shall be in
accordance with Formula-3.3.2.
I u (Z ) = I u (10) ⋅ (Z 10)−α (3.3.2)
Where, α is the exponent shown in Table-3.2.1; I u (10) is the turbulent
intensity at height of 10 m and shall be equal to I u (z ) = 0.10 at the height of
suspended deck.
② Vertical component
The power spectrum density of fluctuating wind speed in the vertical direction
S w ( f ) shall be as shown by Formula-3.3.3. And, the turbulent intensity in the
vertical direction shall be half of that along the main flow.
f ⋅ Sw ( f ) 2.11 ⋅ f r
2
= (3.3.3)
w 1 + 11.2 ⋅ f r 5 3
Where, f r is the non-dimensional frequency and is to be f r = f ⋅ Z U z .
③ Spatial correlation of fluctuating wind speeds
Decay factor to be used for expression of the spatial correlation with an exponential
function shall be 8 for both the main flow direction and vertical direction.
(４) Influence of surrounding terrain
If the terrain around the bridge site is complicated and wind condition might be
accordingly distorted, it is recommended to use special turbulent characteristics which
are actually obsevred in wind tunnel test with surrounding terrain model, instead of the
above mentioned rule.

3.4 Inclination angle and azimuth angle of wind

Inclination angle to be considered in wind resistant design shall basically be in
accordance with Table-3.4.1. When there is a possibility that dominant inclination angle
exists because of the surrounding terrain, this angle shall be placed at the center of
investigation. In addition, angle associated with torsional deformation of the suspended
deck due to wind load shall be properly taken into consideration, when this angle
becomes significant.

Table-3.4.1 Inclination angle of wind

Air flow Inclination

Uniform flow −３゜∼ ＋３゜

Turbulent flow ０゜
As for the azimuth angle of the wind, the perpendicular direction to the bridge axis
can be assumed. However, any azimuth angle that may be generated by surrounding
terrain or by structural characteristics shall also be used, when this angle seems to
exert larger influence on the bridge.

4 Static Design

4.1 Static wind load

In static design, only drag component in the aerostatic force shall be considered as the
design wind load.
・Wind load acting on the main cable and suspender ropes of a suspension bridge,
stay-cables of a cable-stayed bridge and the suspended deck of both:

ρ ⋅U z 2
PD = µ 2 C D An (4.1.1)
2
・Wind load acting on the tower:

ρ ⋅U z 2
PD = µ 3 C D An (4.1.2)
2
 Where, the modification factors µ 2 and µ 3 shall be as given in Table-4.1.1; the air
density ρ shall be 0.12 kg･sec2 ･m-4 (1.18 kg/m3); the design wind speed U z shall be
according to the rule in 3.2; and the drag coefficient C D as well as the projection area
An shall be determined by Tables-4.1.2 and –4.1.3, respectively.
The drag coefficient used in the above-mentioned calculation shall be verified in wind
tunnel test, and re-design is to be done when the coefficient that is measured at the attack
angle of 0 degree in the perpendicular airflow to the bridge axis differs from the value used
in the design by 5 % or more.

Table-4.1.1 Modification factors

Structural part Suspended structure Tower
Direction Transverse Longitudinal Transverse Longitudinal
Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge
Cable μ２ 1.55 − 1.35 −
Suspender μ２ 1.55 1.25 1.35 1.25
Stiffening truss
1.50 (Top fixed)
Tower μ３ − − 1.55
1.75 (Top freed)
Kurushima-Kaikyo Bridges
Cable
Suspender μ２ 2.0 1.3 1.7 1.3
Stiffening girder
1.55 (Top fixed)
Tower μ３ − − 1.4
1.7 (Top freed)
Tatara Bridge
Cable μ２ 1.9 1.35 1.65 1.35
Girder
μ３ 1.5 (Top fixed)
Tower 1.9 1.5 1.65 1.8 (Top freed)
 Table-4.1.2 Drag coefficient
Transverse direction Longitudinal direction
Structural part
CD Note CD Note
Based on result of
60% of CD in
Truss type w i n d t u n n e l t e s t When measured
for similar shape transverse direction
Suspended value on similar
structure Based on result of shape is available,
Box girder 30% of CD in
wind tunnel test use it
type for similar shape transverse direction

1.8 Per one shaft 1.8 For rectangular

or of rectangular or shaped tower
Tower based on result of based on result of
shaped tower
wind tunnel test wind tunnel test
for similar shape f o r s i mi l a r s h a p e
Suspension cable 0.7 −
0.7/ 2 For truss deck
Suspender rope 0.7
0.7 For box girder deck
Stay cable 0.7 0.7

Table-4.1.3 Way of determination of projection area

Structural part Transverse direction Longitudinal direction
Windward side of girder, curb and guard
Suspended structure Same as transverse
rail
Tower Windward and leeward shafts Both shafts and web members
Suspension cable Windward and leeward cables Neglect
Suspender rope Windward and leeward suspender ropes Same as transverse
Stay cable Windward and leeward cables Same as transverse

4.2 Loading method of design wind load

The design wind load shall generally be regarded as a uniformly distributing horizontal load in the
perpendicular direction or the longitudinal direction to a bridge. However when necessary, such
loading method shall be taken that full intensity is given to a certain area and half intensity is given
to the rest so as to yield most unfavorable influence to a specific member. The followings are
individual loading method for every part of a bridge.
(1) Wind load in the perpendicular direction to a bridge
①Suspended deck wind load is to be given on the windward side of the structure.
②Tower wind load is to be given on both axis lines of windward and leeward
shafts.
③Suspension cable uniformly distributing load is to be given along the cable axis.
④Stay-cable wind load acting on stay-cables is equally divided and each is to be
given to the suspended deck and the tower(s).
(2) Wind load in the longitudinal direction to a bridge
①Suspended deck longitudinal wind load is to be uniformly given to the structure.
②Tower all the wind load, which is decided by entire projection area of shafts
and web members, is to be uniformly given.
③Suspension cable half of wind load acting on the suspender ropes is to be considered, but
those acting on the cable itself is to be neglected.
④Suspender ropes of a suspension bridge wind load acting on suspenders is equally
divided and each is to be given to the suspended
deck and the cable.
⑤Stay-cable wind load acting on stay-cables is equally divided and each is to be
given to the suspended deck and the tower(s).
(3) Influence of skewed wind
Simultaneous loading both in the perpendicular direction and the longitudinal direction to the
bridge axis shall be made for designing such structural elements as shoes of the deck, expansion
joints, stays and so on, to which the longitudinal displacement will become a concern.

4.3 Combination of wind load and other loads, increase of allowable stress
Combination of the wind loads and other loads as well as increase of the allowable stress shall
be in accordance with Table-4.3.1.

Table-4.3.1 Combination of wind load and other loads, increase of allowable stress

Increase of allowable stress

Combination of loads
Tower Suspended structure

D+W+T+SD+E 1.40 1.50

Where, D: Dead load, W: Wind load, T: Influence of temperature change (when it is combined
with the design wind load, the temperature shall be 35 ℃),SD: Influence of movement of
supporting points, and E: Influence of error in fabrication and erection of superstructure.
 5 Verification

5.1 Static verification

The suspended deck shall have enough stiffness so as to avoid occurrence of static instability due to
the wind load.

5.2 Dynamic verification

5.2.1 Structural damping
As for the structural damping to be used in dynamic verification of bridges, the values shown
in Table-5.2.1 shall be used as standard values for any vibration modes.

Table-5.2.1 Structural damping (logarithmic decrement)

Logarithmic decrement
Vibration mode and structural part
Bending vibration Torsional vibration
0.02
Deck-vibration Stiffening truss 0.03 Can be 0.03 for span
dominant mode of 500-600m or less
Closed-box girder 0.02 0.02
Tower-vibration Tower-cable-girder system 0.02 0.02
dominant mode Free-standing tower 0.01 0.01
Stay-cable-vibration dominant mode 0.003 -
Suspender-rope-vibration dominant mode 0.003 -

When additional structural damping is provided by placing dampers and so on in order to

suppress vortex-induced oscillation of tower, rain vibration of stay-cables, vibration of suspender
ropes, etc., capability of the damping devices shall be ascertained.

5.2.2 Verification against divergent type vibration

For the suspended deck and tower, their critical wind speed of divergent type vibration in the
uniform flow shall be confirmed as satisfying the following formula
U F ≥ 1.2 ⋅ µ F ⋅ U z (5.2.1)
Where, µ F : modification factor for the suspended deck regarding to fluctuating wind
speed and is to be as shown in Table-5.2.2, and U z : design wind speed.
Table-5.2.2 Modification factor for divergent type vibration of deck by fluctuating wind speed
Bridge μF
Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge 1.08
Tatara Bridge 1.1
Kurushima-Kaikyo Bridge 1.1

5.2.3 Verification against gust response

Safety of the suspended deck and tower against gust response shall be confirmed through gust
response analysis. In addition, the safety shall generally be checked through wind tunnel test
with boundary layer turbulent airflow as well. If the stress that is determined by the gust
response analysis or the wind tunnel test exceeds the allowable stress by 5 % or more, re-design
shall be done. Depending on scale of the bridge, structural type, wind environment at the site and
so on, the verification against gust response, however, can be omitted when modification
factors of µ 2 and/or µ 3 specified in 4.1 are used.

5.2.4 Verification against vortex-induced oscillation

When there is a possibility for a bridge or its members to have harmful vortex-induced
oscillation, the safety and serviceability shall be carefully checked.

5.2.5 Verification against cable vibration

When there is a possibility for stay-cables or suspender ropes to have harmful wind-induced
oscillation, countermeasures to secure safety shall be carefully studied.

6 Safety During Erection Work

6.1 Basic wind speed during erection work

In order to investigate safety during the erection work, the basic wind speed given in
Table-6.1.1 shall generally be used.

Table-6.1.1 Basic wind speed during erection work

Bridge Basic wind speed during erection work (m/s)
Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge 37
Tatara Bridge 29
Kurushima-Kaikyo Bridge 31
6.2 Items to be studied
Bridges under construction, especially for freey-standing tower before cable erection and main
cables or suspended deck during erection work, are vulnerable to strong wind. Accordingly,
proper countermeasures shall be taken by checking static and dynamic safety against
wind-induced phenomena through wind tunnel test and/or other methods, if necessary to any
erection stage.