Tensegrity footbridges with arch deck: static and dynamic

behaviour
Bruno Briseghella
College of Civil Engineering, University of Fuzhou, Fuzhou, China
Luigi Fenu and Wenjin Huang
Department of Structural Engineering, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
Tobia Zordan
College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai, China

ABSTRACT: Tensegrity principle can be assumed in the conceptual design of footbridges.

Although they are quite deformable, their structural behaviour under static loads is quite good.
The dynamic behaviour is also quite good, but vibrations under pedestrian flow have to be
controlled. After defining feasible constructional types and their detailing, static and dynamic
analysis are performed. Modal analysis has been carried out by finite element method. It has
been found that geometric nonlinearity would greatly influence the modal analysis, and that
tensegrity footbridges with arch deck have better dynamic behaviour than those with straight
deck. The influence of the dimensions of each member and of footbridge geometry on bridge
behaviour is analysed. Finally, some suggestions about structural optimization are summarized.

1 INTRODUCTION

A tensegrity system is a spatial structure formed by a set of continuous tensile components and
discontinuous compressive components. The tensegrity system can utilize compression and
tensile members efficiently, allowing to greatly reduce the self-weight of the structure.
Structures following the tensegrity principle were identified in the second half of the past
century, although with very few the applications to architecture and civil engineering.
(Füller R. B. 1962, 1975) firstly introduced these interesting structures and patented a
so-called tensile-integrity structure. (Snelson K. 1965) also invented a similar structure
composed of continuous tension and discontinuous compression members. (Pugh A. 1976)
provided systematic illustration of tensegrity system with some feasible schemes. From these
pioneering authors onward, research about applications of such structures has been carried out
by many researchers all over the world, see for instance (Gordon J. E. 1988; Motro R. 1992;
Ingber D.E. 1998; Micheletti A. et al. 2005) and (Frumar J. A. et al. 2009).
Although tensegrity systems have a lot of favourable properties, tensegrities in architecture
and civil engineering are very rare, and only few constructions have been built, for instance
some transmitting antenna towers. In bridge engineering they can be mainly used for
footbridges, since deflections are quite high. The principal advantage of tensegrity bridges is
that their weight is very low. Moreover, they are mainly made of cables, and their construction
can often be quite simple, provided that a suitable construction program is studied in advance.
A preliminary study on tensegrity footbridges with prestressed straight deck was carried out
by (Briseghella B. et al. 2010). In this paper, this study is extended to tensegrity footbridges
with arch deck (Fig.1). Deck prestressing is still used, in order to avoid that high tensile forces
are transmitted from the cables to the embankment foundations. Moreover, the arch shape of the
deck provides further stiffness to the bridge. Compared to the straight deck (Briseghella B. et al.
2010), the arch deck highly decreases positive in plane bending of its longitudinal beams,
especially close to the bank, and greatly decreases the deck deflection, too. Nevertheless,
geometric nonlinearity still occurs, and must be taken into account when structural analysis is
performed. Finite elements have been used, and ANSYS program has shown to be suitable for
this purpose.
288 ARCH’10 – 6th International Conference on Arch Bridges

2 BRIDGE DESCRIPTION

The footbridge includes deck support, cable support system and foundations. The deck is made
of two longitudinal beams, two end transverse beams, four transverse beams supported by
diagonal cables along the bridge span, and a composite steel-concrete deck (Fig.2). The cable
support system includes two main cables, five struts by side, diagonal cables between strut ends
and transverse beams, transverse cables between the ends of symmetric struts. Steel longitudinal
beams have rectangular box section, and are filled by concrete to increase their resistance
under the axial compression force due to main cable’s prestressing force. Transverse beams pull
diagonal cables outward to limit transverse and longitudinal displacements of columns and main
cables.

Figure 1 : Finite element model

ble

Transverse beam
Ca

3900
al
on
ag

Up
ble
Di

pe
Ca rM
ain ain
rM Ca
2600
Di

pe ble
Up
ag
on
al
Ca

Bottom M
ain Cable
ble

Deck / Longitudinal Beam

1300

5000 5000 5000 5000 5000 5000

30000

(a)
le Di
ab ag
lC on
500

a al
on C
ag
Transverse Beam
Transverse Cable

Di ab
le
End Transverse Beam

Main Cable
3400

Longitudinal Beam
2000

6600
500

7500 5000 5000 5000 7500

30000

(b)

Figure 2 : Dimensions of the footbridge (unit: mm) : (a) Elevation, (b) Plane

For both static and aesthetic considerations, parabolic curves are adopted for main cables and
arch deck, strut spacing is constant along the span. For the sake of balancing diagonal cable’s
forces and with also aesthetic value, the rise of the arch deck is chosen in order to have same
distance between upper and bottom main cables and the deck. As a result, rise of the upper main
cable, rise of arch deck and sag of the bottom main cable are 6.5 m, 2.6 m and 1.3 m,
respectively.
In order to support the arch deck and provide enough stiffness, main cables are prestressed by
1000 MPa, while diagonal and transverse cables are both prestressed by 200 MPa. The
composite steel-concrete deck is adopted to facilitate construction and provide additional
rigidity to the overall structure especially for out of plane bending. The configuration detail of
composite steel-concrete deck along the longitudinal direction is illustrated in Fig.3. The
composite steel-concrete deck is connected to the longitudinal beams by circular headed studs.
B. Briseghella, L. Fenu, W. Huang, etc. 289

The composite steel-concrete deck is modeled as a beam grid system. It is assumed that
longitudinal rigidity of the deck is provided by a concrete thickness of only 30mm, and steel has
not been considered. For transverse rigidity of the arch deck, only concaved concrete is
considered, so that the calculate width is assumed to be 100mm for a wave band 300mm wide.

30
80
45°

50 200 200 200

100 50 100 100 100

Figure 3 : Configuration of deck (unit: mm)

Table 1 : Section and material of member

Section type Material Dimension
Main cable Prestressed steel strand φ s 1860 10 φ 15.2
s

Diagonal cable Fine twisted steel bar JL 540 φ 25

Transverse cable Fine twisted steel bar JL 540 φ 25
Longitudinal CFST box girder, S355 Steel
BB 500×200×10
beam two-celled box C50 concrete
Transverse beam I-shaped steel girder S355 Steel HW 294×302×12/12
Composite S355 corrugated steel sheet
Deck slab See Fig.3
steel-concrete section C50 concrete
End transverse Rectangular R.C. S355 reinforcement
400×400
beam girder C40 concrete

3 MODAL ANALYSIS
3.1 Geometric nonlinearity
Tensegrity footbridge is a cable system. Since cable rigidity is proportioned to its force,
different cable rigidity would greatly influence the structure behavior. Both in static and in
dynamic analysis, large deformations affect structural rigidity. Therefore, during modal analysis
geometric nonlinearity has to be taken into account. The results of modal analysis with or
without the contribution of geometric nonlinearity are listed in Table 2, where different mode
shapes of first order are also listed.
As shown in Table 2, geometric nonlinearity influences greatly the natural frequencies of the
bridge, but the effect is not the same for different mode shapes. When geometric nonlinearity
has not been considered, the frequencies of symmetric and antisymmetric out of plane bending
modes are underestimated by 20%. Since out of plane bending mode is particularly affected by
cable’s rigidity, to neglect geometric nonlinearity would decrease the overall rigidity of the
structure and their natural frequencies.
Footbridges, especially for first and second mode shapes, need that natural frequencies are
less than 3 Hz (Zivanovic S. et al. 2005). Since for first order symmetric out of plane bending
the frequency is lower than 3 Hz, geometric nonlinearity cannot be neglected.
Natural frequencies are also increase by geometric nonlinearity also for the mode shape of in
plane bending. Geometric nonlinearity increases the antisymmetric in plane bending by 16%,
while the symmetric one is increased by only 2%.
As far as it regards the mode shape of twisting, if geometric nonlinearity is not taken into
account, the frequencies of first order symmetric or antisymmetric twisting are only 7% or 12%
of the compared ones. Cables are mainly involved by twisting, so that the effect of large
deformations of cable is very important for the rigidity of the overall structure.
Without considering geometric nonlinearity, cable rigidity would be underestimated so much
that the mode shapes of twisting would emerge as the first seven ones. Most of mode shapes of
twisting would not involve deck support system or only involve a local part of cables. In other
words, large deformations are able to change the order of mode shapes and frequencies.
290 ARCH’10 – 6th International Conference on Arch Bridges

Table 2 : Effect of Large deformation for modal analysis

Frequency
Mode shape
Nonlinear Linear Ratio
/HZ /HZ
Out of plane bending in plane bending

Symmetric 2.36 1.87 79%

Antisymmetric 11.32 9.05 80%

Symmetric 3.42 3.48 102%

Antisymmetric 4.48 5.18 116%

Symmetric 7.07 0.47 7%

twisting

Antisymmetric 4.58 0.57 12%

3.2 Arch deck vs. straight deck

By investigating the differences of dynamic behaviour between tensegrity footbridges with arch
and straight deck, frequencies and mode shapes of first ten orders of the two types of bridges are
listed in Table 3, For this aim, comparisons are made with a tensegrity bridgewith straight deck
and with same rise of the main cable.

Table 3 : comparison of natural frequency and mode shape for two bridges with different decks
Frequency
Mode shape
/HZ
Order
Straight
Arch deck Arch deck Straight deck
deck
1 2.36 1.5 Symmetric out of plane bending Symmetric twisting

2 3.42 4.21 Symmetric in plane bending Symmetric in plane bending

3 4.19 4.27 Symmetric out of plane bending Antisymmetric in plane bending

4 4.48 4.28 Antisymmetric in plane bending Symmetric out of plane bending

5 4.58 4.78 Antisymmetric twisting Antisymmetric twisting

6 5.40 5.39 Symmetric in plane bending Symmetric in plane bending

7 5.97 6.42 Symmetric twisting Antisymmetric in plane bending

8 6.34 7.20 Antisymmetric twisting Symmetric twisting

9 7.07 8.13 Symmetric twisting Symmetric twisting

10 7.10 8.37 Antisymmetric in plane bending Symmetric in plane bending

B. Briseghella, L. Fenu, W. Huang, etc. 291

In Table 3 it can be found that there are some differences of free vibration between the two
types of bridges. For the bridge with arch deck, the first order mode shape is out of plane
bending, while for the bridge with straight deck, twisting would emerge as the first order mode
shape.
Since both the frequencies of first order of both types of bridges are less than for 3 Hz, the
bridge with arch deck behaves better than the bridge with straight deck because, for the first
mode shape, frequency of the former one is 60% higher than that of the latter one. Contrarily,
for the other mode shapes, although frequencies are very similar, the ones of the former are
lower than those of the latter, except for the fourth mode.
From Table 3 it can be inferred that the bridge with arch deck is better to resist twisting but
will lose some part of rigidity to resist bending of the deck.

3.3 Influence of rise

Rise of main cables and arch deck are very important for the overall structural rigidity, so
different rises are studied. To allow the flow of pedestrians under the lowest transverse cables,
and for aesthetic considerations, the possible rise of the upper main cable for a span of 30 m
cannot be lower than 6.0 m. In the following modal analysis, the ratio of rise of upper main
cable, rise of arch deck and sag of bottom main cable are kept constant when the rise of upper
main cable varies. Frequencies of first order mode shapes for different rises are described in
Fig.4.

6.0 1.2
twisting
5.5
in plane bending
Natural frequency /HZ

Natural frequency /HZ

1.1
5.0 out of pane bending
4.5 1.0
4.0
3.5 0.9
3.0 twisting
0.8 in plane bending
2.5
out of pane bending
2.0 0.7
5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 150 200 250 300 350
Rise of upper main cable /m Depth of longitudinal beam /mm

Figure 4 : Relationship of frequencies vs. rise of Figure 5 : Relationship of frequencies vs. depth of
upper main cable longitudinal beam

As shown in Fig.4, frequencies of first order twisting, in plane bending and out of plane bending
vary differently with rise. Both the frequency of out of plane and in plane bending would
linearly vary with rise. The frequency of twisting shows to vary nonlinearly with rise.
All frequencies of in plane bending and twisting modes are higher than 3 Hz. The increase of
frequency of twisting mode slows down when rise is higher than 6.5 m. When rise increases
from 5.5 m to 7.5 m, the frequency of out of plane bending decreases from 2.60 Hz to 2.15 Hz.
Since the frequencies of out of plane bending modes are lower than 3 Hz, a rise increase worses
the dynamic response of the footbridge under pedestrian. As a result, a smaller rise appears to be
better for the pedestrian flow.

3.4 Influence of depth of longitudinal beam

Section size of longitudinal beams can influence their rigidity as well as the rigidity of the deck
support system. Of course, different section size of longitudinal beams would result in different
mass, too. The relationship of frequencies of different shape modes and depth of longitudinal
beams is illustrated in Fig.5.
From Fig.5, it can be found that frequencies of mode shapes of twisting and out of plane
bending is noticeably increased with the depth increase of longitudinal beams. When the depth
292 ARCH’10 – 6th International Conference on Arch Bridges

is higher than 300 mm, however, the frequency of twisting would decrease and the increase of
frequency of out of plane bending slows down. When the depth is smaller than 300 mm, the
depth of longitudinal is a key option for increasing the frequency of out of plane bending and
twisting modes.
As for the mode shape of in plane bending, the frequency would slightly change in a complex
way. Although the depth could noticeably change the flexural rigidity of longitudinal beams for
in plane bending, bigger depth also increases the mass. Of course, the mode shape of in plane
bending is also controlled by the in plane constraint provided by the cable support system. As a
result, the depth of longitudinal beams should not be a primary option for increasing the
frequency of in plane bending mode.

3.5 Influence of deck slab’s thickness

As shown previously, the first and second order mode shapes of the footbridge is out of plane
and in plane bending. These two mode shapes involve both deck and cable support system.
Therefore, the influence of rigidity of deck slab on natural frequency is studied, see Fig.6. The
rigidity of deck slab is considered by the thickness of deck slab.
From Fig.6, it can be found that thickness of deck slab doesn’t change the frequencies
greatly. As for the out of plane bending mode, the frequency will vary linearly with the
thickness of deck slab. But the frequency would only increase by 4% when the thickness
increases from 30mm to 50mm, by 67%. As for the in plane bending mode, influence of
thickness increasement is negative. The frequency would nearly decrease by 6% when the
thickness increases from 30 mm to 50 mm. The frequency of twisting mode can hardly change
when the thickness increases. Therefore, thickness of deck slab is not a good option to increase
natural frequencies of the bridge.
1.2
Comparative value of frequency

1.1

1.0

0.9
twisting
0.8 in plane bending
out of pane bending
0.7
30 35 40 45 50
Thickness of deck slab /mm

Figure 6 : Relationship of frequencies vs. thickness of deck slab

3.6 Influence of sectional area and prestress of main cable

Main cables are fundamental to support the arch deck through diagonal cables. Thus, axial
rigidity of main cable is important to constraint the deformation of deck and affects the dynamic
behaviours. The relationship between natural frequencies and axial rigidity of main cables is
shown in Fig.7. The relative axial rigidity is calculated based on sectional area of upper main
cable, with bottom main cable increasing its size at the same rate.
Similar to the rise, axial rigidity of main cable affects the natural frequencies of first and
second order shapes in different ways. Since the main cable cannot effectively affect the out of
plane rigidity of the structure, the frequency of out of plane bending of arch deck increases only
a little when the sectional area of main cable increases. The variation of frequency of twisting
mode is even smaller, while the frequency of in plane bending of the arch deck increases
prominently. From the relationship curve, it can be inferred that it is effective to use a larger
size main cable to obtain a higher frequency of in plane bending of arch deck.
Cable behaves nonlinearly with its inside stress. Too less stress would make the cable lose its
rigidity, but too much stress would cause difficulty during construction. Higher prestress of
main cable would decrease deck’s deflection downward under load. When the magnitude of the
B. Briseghella, L. Fenu, W. Huang, etc. 293

prestress of upper and bottom main cables is the same, the relationship of first five orders’
frequencies with initial prestress of main cable is illustrated in Fig.8. Initial prestress does not
change emerging order of different modes, so a same order mode has a same mode shape.
1.2 1.2

Comparative value of frequency

Comparative value of frequency

1.1 1.1

1.0 1.0

0.9 0.9
twisting
twisting in plane bending
0.8 in plane bending 0.8
out of pane bending
out of pane bending
0.7 0.7
50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 50% 75% 100% 125% 150%
comparative value of sectional area Comparative value of prestress

Figure 7 : Relationship of frequencies vs. sectional Figure 8 : Relationship of frequencies vs. initial
area of main cable prestress of main cable

From Fig.8, it can be found that initial prestress of main cable does not affect the natural
frequencies too much, especially for the lower order modes. For the first and second order
modes, initial prestressing of main cables almost does not change natural frequencies of the
bridge. For third and higher orders, the frequencies are higher than 3 Hz and can change even
less. This means that prestressing of main cables does not affect too much the natural
frequencies. Therefore, the prestressing of main cables should be decided from considerations
about stress relaxation and static rigidity during structural design.

3.7 Influence of sectional area and prestress of diagonal cables

Since both out of plane bending and twisting modes would involve the cable support system,
then cross-sectional area and prestress are chosen to study the influence of rigidity of diagonal
cable on frequency (see Fig.9 and 10). Cross-sectional area and prestress of lateral cables show
to change at the same rate as that of diagonal cables.

1.20 1.20
Comparative value of frequency
Comparative value of frequency

1.10 1.10

1.00 1.00

0.90 0.90
twisting
twisting in plane bending
0.80 in plane bending 0.80
out of pane bending
out of pane bending
0.70 0.70
50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 50% 75% 100% 125% 150%
comparative value of sectional area Comparative value of prestress

Figure 9 : Relationship of frequencies vs. sectional Figure 10 : Relationship of frequencies vs. initial
area of diagonal cable prestress of diagonal cable

From Fig.9, it can be found that in plane bending does not change when the sectional area of
diagonal cable changes. Although out of plane bending and twisting modes change when the
sectional area of diagonal cable changes, the magnitude is rather small and can be neglected.
This phenomenon can also be found when the prestress of diagonal cables changes, as shown in
Fig.10.
294 ARCH’10 – 6th International Conference on Arch Bridges

4 CONCLUSIONS

In tensegrity footbridges with both straight and arch deck, geometric nonlinearity could greatly
change the vibration mode shapes, and therefore should be taken into account during finite
element analysis. Generally speaking, static and free vibration behaviour of tensegrity
footbridges with arch deck are in general better than in the case of straight deck. Rise of main
cables show to increase the frequency of in plane bending mode, while slightly decreases that of
out of plane bending and twisting modes.
Increasing the depth of longitudinal beams changes the frequencies of out of plane bending
and twisting modes, without changing so much the frequency of in plane bending mode. The
thickness of deck slab would change rigidity and mass of the deck at the same time, but the
influence of deck slab thickness on frequencies is not so much. Axial rigidity including
sectional area and prestress of main cable would greatly influence the frequencies, but different
modes would change in different ways. The influence of cross-sectional area and prestress of
diagonal cable is instead negligible.
The dynamic response of the tensegrity footbridge with arch deck appears to be reasonable.
Moreover, the footbridge show to have good static behaviour. However, more attention should
be paid to the deck’s out of plane rigidity. For instance, a slight width increase of the arch deck
would be useful to increase the natural frequency for out of plane bending mode.

REFERENCES

Briseghella Bruno, Fenu Luigi, Huang Wenjin and Zordan Tobia, 2010. Tensegrity bridge with
prestressed deck, 34th international symposium on bridge and structural engineering 2010, Venice,
IABSE.
Burkhardt R. W., 2009. A practical guide to tensegrity design, http://angelfire.com/ma4/bob_wb/ tenseg/
pdf.
Frumar J. A., Zhou Y. Y., Xie Y. M. and Burry M. C., 2009. Tensegrity structures with 3-D compressed
components, development, assembly and design, Journal of the international association of shell and
spatial structures, 50(2): p.99-110.
Füller R. B., 1962. Tensile-integrity structures, U.S. Patent N. 3063521.
Füller R. B. and Synergetics B., 1975. Explorations in the geometry of thinking, New York, MacMillan
Publisher Ltd.
Gordon J. E., 1988. The science of structures and materials, New York, Scientific American Library.
Ingber D. E., 1998. The architecture of life, Scientific American Magazine, 278, p. 48-57.
Micheletti A., Nicotra V., Podio-Guidugli P. and Stucchi S., 2005. The tensegrity footbridge at
Torvergata University in Rome. Proc. of the 2nd international conference footbridge 2005, Venice,
p.159-160.
Motro R., 1992. Tensegrity systems, the state of the art, International journal of space structures, 7, p.
75-84.
Pugh A., 1976. An introduction to tensegrity, Berkeley, California, University of California Press.
Snelson K., 1965. Continuous tension, discontinuous compression structures, U.S. Patent N. 3169611.
Zivanovic S., Pavic A. and Reynolds P., 2005. Vibration serviceability of footbridges under
human-induced excitation, a literature review, Journal of sound and vibration, 279, p.1-74.