Post-Tensioned Glass Beams for a 9 m Spannglass Bridge

Michael Engelmann, Dipl.-Ing.; Bernhard Weller, Prof. Dr.-Ing. Technische Universitt Dresden Institute of Building
Construction, Dresden, Germany. Contact: michael.engelmann@tu-dresden.de
DOI: 10.2749/101686616X14555428759000

Abstract deviators reduced the transparency in

the appearance considerably. A com-
Glass beams may be reinforced to allow for a fail-safe behaviour and to avoid parative analysis to other results was
brittle and total collapse. This approach from reinforced concrete design is not available.
applied to glass and extended by post-tensioning the reinforcement by using
Spannglass beams. A high-grade steel cable relieves the brittle material from When spans exceed typical flat glass
unbeneficial tensile stress and accommodates permanent dead-load deflection. A sizes of up to 9 m, intermediate glass-
structural concept was evolved that led to the development of Spannglass beams, to-glass connections are necessary.
which were tested for a span of 2 m. This concept was extended to larger spans Researchers from the University of
in order to consider size effects and to provide this option to a broader field of Pisa (Italy) introduced a specific con-
application. To verify this, a 9 m pedestrian glass bridge with post-tensioned rein- cept named Glass Tensegrity Truss
forcement was designed and tested experimentally. Three full-size glass speci- in Refs. [12] and [13] to solve this
mens were utilised with adhesive connectors and two reinforcement designs. A dilemma structurally. Glass panels
post-tensioning concept was finalised and put into practice. Finally, four-point were used to brace a segmented spa-
bending tests were performed to yield the maximum loads. This paper explains tial steel grid structure. As multiple
the experimental design, presents the results and provides conclusions of how to panels were used, a higher redundancy
design workable structural glass beams with post-tensioned reinforcement. The was achieved. Furthermore, the load
paper also presents the design process and the construction of a 9 m Spannglass transfer between glass and steel was
Bridge used by pedestrians at Glasstec 2014 in Dsseldorf, Germany. realised without adhesive connections
but by using pre-stressed force-fittings.
Keywords: glass beam; reinforced girder; glass bridge; post-tensioning; redun- However, this option included numer-
dancy; experimental study; structural glass. ous opaque parts that compromised
the transparency of the glass.
Two pioneering building projects that
Introduction Ref. [6] in 2013 based on research con- include pre-stressed glass structures
ducted in Delft (Delft University of have been published.14,15 In 2002, the
Glass beams are transparent and ele- Technology, Netherlands), Lausanne Tower Place building in London, UK,
gant structures in modern architec- (EPFL Lausanne, Switzerland) and was opened to the public. It includes
ture. They are used to carry roofs and Ghent (Ghent University, Belgium). a large glass facade in front of verti-
stiffen facades without blocking day- The studies concluded a significant cal steel columns. Post-tensioned
light. As a primary structural element, increase in initial failure load as well glass tubes transfer live loads to the
they need to guarantee integrity of as a fail-safe behaviour. The impact of substructure. During wind suction,
the buildings and structural elements. the unbonded and post-tensioned ten- the tendons are loaded, whereas dur-
Glass is a brittle material. It fails with- dons, anchored at the beam ends, on ing pressure, the glass tubes are acti-
out plastic deformation and requires a the post-initial crack strength inspired vated.14 This project demonstrated the
fail-safe concept that allows for a safe further studies6 where the safe and feasibility of using mechanically pre-
post-breakage behaviour. Today, this is reliable introduction of loads onto stressed glass in tensegrity structures,
achieved by oversizing conventional the laminated glass edge remained an early on.
glass beams and thus reducing its open question.
Two years later in 2004, the thermal
probability of failure to near-zero. This
Continuing investigations in Lausanne bath in Badenweiler, Germany, wel-
contradicts an optimal material utilisa-
proceeded by bonding flat pre-ten- comed its guests under a new glass
tion. A current enhanced approach is
sioned stainless steel tendons to the roof, which is supported by curved
to reinforce glass beams using ductile
glass edge without anchors at the beam glass beams with 10 mm, post-ten-
steel, an approach inspired by rein-
ends. The promising results in Refs. [7] sioned steel cables.15 Unfortunately,
forced concrete design.1,2 Additionally,
and [8] showed an increase in fracture this has remained a single implementa-
the reinforcement may be post-
strength and a quasi-ductile post-frac- tion but has inspired further research.
tensioned to relieve the glass from
ture behaviour. However, this research
unwanted tensile stress.320 In summary, several exploratory ideas
is still in progress.
sprung up all over Europe, as presented
Exploratory experimental results
The common ground of post-tensioned so far. During this research, the focus
were published from Ref. [3] in 2004,
glass beams in Refs. [311] included was on a flexible reinforced glass beam
Ref. [4] in 2006, Ref. [5] in 2012 and
internal tendons only. An external concept with rectangular glass plates
structural solution was provided by the without any special or expensive edge
Peer-reviewed by international ex- processing. Furthermore, plastic block-
perts and accepted for publication
research at the University of Coimbra
by SEI Editorial Board (Portugal)911 which confirmed the ing materials, whose performance was
increase in initial crack strength and proven in Ref. [21] were used. This led
Paper received: October 15, 2015 a ductile post-breakage response to to the novel cross-section concept pre-
Paper accepted: January 27, 2016 this option. However, the external sented in Refs. [1620]. These beams

Structural Engineering International Nr. 2/2016 Scientific Paper 103

are referred to as Spannglass beams
inspired by the prestressed reinforced
concrete design.
During the initial exploratory analysis,
the influence of the applied pre-stress
on the deformational behaviour of
2 m Spannglass beams was analysed to
describe the effect of an uneven load
transfer onto the laminated glass, which
cannot be prevented owing to produc-
tion tolerances.17 Later, the beam con-
cept demonstrated an increased load
capacity depending on the type of
structural connections within the glass
elements.18
The span in previous laboratory studies
was limited to 2 m; thus, further stud-
ies were necessary for an application in
roofs and facades to cover size effects
and show that typical spans of up to
9 m are realisable. Therefore, this paper
presents the results of an experimental
series of three 9 m glass beams with
a 24 mm high-grade spiral cable ten-
sioned up to 100 kN.
The primary aim was to describe the
load-bearing behaviour of large-span,
post-tensioned glass beams and deter-
mine their ultimate load. The second-
ary aim was to present a practical
application by designing a 9 m pedes-
trian bridge based on the beam design
that was displayed at Glasstec 2014 in
Dsseldorf, Germany.
Methods
Study Design
Three, full-size glass beam specimens
were tested for four-point bending to
determine the ultimate load and the
overall load-bearing behaviour. The
load was applied in three steps. First,
the beams were post-tensioned up to the
designated cable load P0. Afterwards,
the specimens were loaded by a pre-
load of F = 5 kN. Next, the test started
by applying a bending load rate. At first,
non-destructive tests were performed
with initial cable loads of P0 = 0 kN,
50 kN, 75 kN and 100 kN and a non-
destructive bending load of Fmax (see
Table 2). Finally, destructive bending
tests were executed at P0 = 50 kN. The
tests were performed at room tempera-
tures of 2628C in the testing facility.
Materials and Specimens
Three specimens with a span of 9 m
and a height of 0.6 m were prepared.
The glass cross-section consisted of
two packages of laminated safety glass.
Each package was made of two panes
of 12 mm heat-strengthened glass (HS)
104 Scientific Paper
and a 1.52 mm Polyvinyl butyral (PVB)
interlayer. Stainless steel connectors
joined both packages adhesively creat-
ing a partial box section. The bearing
held a 24 mm spiral cable with design
limit tension of 326 kN while the
250 mm long stainless steel connectors
deviated from the reinforcement and
allowed for sliding along the cable axis.
Specimens 1 and 3 included two con-
nectors, while specimen 2 included one
connector at centre span (see Fig. 1).
Test Set-up and Measurement
Equipment
The four-point bending set-up is shown
in Fig. 1. A bearing, which restrained
a torsional deflection, held the beam
at each end. Furthermore, a fork-like
bearing prevented the lateral deflec-
tion at the beams third point.
Linear strain gauges at centre span:
one at each glass pane (bottom edge,
ebottom,1-4) and two at the inner glass
panes (top edge, etop2-3) recorded the
strain of the glass. Internal sensors
of the testing machine recorded the
vertical deflection wz of the loading
beam as well as the applied bending
load F. Therefore, the vertical deflec-
tion was recorded during bending
only. According to the assumptions in
Ref. [22] the rate of loading was set to
0.98 mm/s which resulted in a tensile
stress rate of 2 N/(mm2s) in the glass.
The slender beams were prone to lat-
eral failure. Furthermore, the lateral
deflection contributed to a change in
the length of the unbonded cable dur-
ing bending, which determines the
final cable force. Therefore, two dis-
placement gauges measured the lateral
deflection at the top and bottom edges
of the glass at centre span (ny.top and
ny.bottom). Finally, displacement gauges
Detail in figure 2
F 2,3 top
wz,A F/2
P P
wz
3000 3000
9000
Fig. 1: Four-point bending test: rig, cross-section and details
at the top edge of the glass near the
bearing recorded the vertical deflec-
tion of the glass (wz.A and wz.B). This
allowed for an analysis of the pure
glass bending and helped to remove
the deflection component of the set-
ting blocks, which held the glass in the
bearing shoe. At the active side, where
the tensioning occurred, the clamping
path (wP) was recorded while a ring
load cell recorded the cable load P at
the passive side (see Fig. 1).
Post-tensioning Process
A temporary threaded rod extended
the cable at the active side. It was
fed through a hollow piston cylinder
sitting on a steel bridge (Fig. 2). The
operator extended the cylinder step-
wise (wP) until the cable reached its
designated load. Afterwards, a clamp
nut was tightened, fixing the tensioned
cable to the bearing and released the
threaded rod. Subsequently, the cyl-
inder remained unloaded during the
load-bearing process. Checking the
cable load as well as the extension of
the cylinder allowed for monitoring of
the tensioning process. This method is
applicable in a real-life structure out-
side of the laboratory. The deforma-
tional behaviour of the beam during
the post-tensioning process was stud-
ied to determine the maximal sub-crit-
ical cable load: the aim was a steady
horizontal deflection at each load step.
As the interlayer material in the lami-
nated glass cross-section deformed
with time, a continuous increase in
deflection at a constant post-critical
cable load was suspected.
Analysis
From the raw data, the twist in the
cross-section q = (vy.top ny.bottom)/h
at centre span was determined. The
24 24
Connector (250 mm)
vy,top
Laminated safety
glass (PVB)
2212 mm HS
S
h = 600
y,v
12 34
Adhesive joint
v y, bottom
Spiral cable 24 mm
(mm) z,w in a groove
Active side Passive side
F/2 wz,B
P; wP
Specimen 1; 3
wz Specimen 2
3000 P; wP
14 bottom
Structural Engineering International Nr. 2/2016

(3) Steel bridge
(2) Hollow piston cylinder
(1) Temporary rod
P/2
P P
P/2
wP
(2) (3) Setting blocks
Fig. 2: Introduction of cable force into the glass edge via setting blocks and post-tensioning
auxiliary construction (labelled in Fig. 1). Displacement gauges recorded the travelling of
the piston (wP) during the post-tensioning process
total deflection of the glass at the third
point results from wz.total = wz (wzA
+ wzB)/2. Additionally, smean gives
the mean stress from the four strain
gauges at the bottom edge and two
strain gauges at the top edge of the
glass, respectively. Altogether, analytic
functions describe the load-bearing
behaviour as a relation between the
parameters: P(wP); q (P) and smean(P)
during the post-tensioning process and
F(wZ); P(wZ); q (wZ) and smean(wZ)
during bending. At the given interval,
linear relations were summarised in
terms of their slope using linear regres-
sion (least squares estimate; R2) to
characterise and compare the results.
Results
Post-Tensioning Deformation
During the post-tensioning process,
consecutive travelling of the piston
(Fig. 2) resulted in a linear increase in
the cable load. After a slip to straighten
the cable (wP < 10 mm), the increase
in cable load at specimens 1 and 3
was 3.74 kN/mm and 3.19 kN/mm,
respectively while a steeper slope
of 5.56 kN/mm was recorded at
specimen 2 (Fig. 3a). Figure 3b shows
the twist in the beam. It was shown to
be linear up to a cable load of P0 =
50 kN. Higher loads resulted in a non-
linear increase in the twist. Therefore,
the cable load of 50 kN during the
destructive tests sets the limit. During
the non-destructive tests with higher
cable loads, the process was stopped
manually when the lateral deflection
increased exponentially.
Furthermore, the post-tensioning
resulted in a linear increase in the
mean compressive stress at the bottom
Structural Engineering International Nr. 2/2016
(4) Clamping nut
(5) Bearing
Displacement gauge wP
P/2
P/2
(5) Load cell
edge (smean.bottom) and in the mean ten-
sile stress at the upper edge (smean.top)
of the glass (Fig. 3c) at a linear slope
(Table 1). The mean change in stress
at the upper edge was about half the
value compared with the absolute
value at the lower edge. Specimen 2
showed a lower increase in stress com-
pared with specimens 1 and 3.
Finally, the post-tensioning process
resulted in a vertical uplift of the beam
as shown in Ref. [17] for smaller sam-
ples. Those values were however not
recorded during this study. Table 1
summarises all the results recorded
during the post-tensioning process.
Non-Destructive Bending at
Alternating Cable Loads
The post-tensioning process resulted
in a tensile stress at the top edge of the
beam as well as a compressive stress at
the lower edge. Their value depended
on the initial cable load P0 according
to Table 2. The bending process decom-
pressed the glass at a rate of 2.18
0.12 N/(mms). The measured strain
drifted apart in a non-linear manner
close to the maximal load Fmax. The
test was stopped manually at this stage.
The displacement controlled tests
resulted in a linear increase in the load
(linear elastic stage). The ratio of bend-
ing load and vertical displacement of
Specimen 1
3.743
P(wP) (kN/mm)
smean.top (P) (N/(mmkN)) 0.068
smean.bottom (P) (N/(mmkN)) 0.139
Note. All results were recorded at 5 Hz. Slopes were calculated using a linear regression within the
evaluation range where R2 is the coefficient of determination.
Table 1: Results of post-tensioning process, slope of function (R > 0.99)
the machine (see K = F(wz) in Table 2
and Fig. 4a) was between 4.8 kN/mm
and 5.1 kN/mm at specimens 1 and 3
with maximal values for P0 = 50 kN and
P0 = 75 kN, respectively. Specimen 2
showed a stiffness between 4.0 kN/mm
and 5.0 kN/mm with a maximal value at
P0 = 50 kN. An initial cable load of P0
= 100 kN resulted in the lowest stiffness
in all cases. The cable loads decreased
the stiffness to a value lower than the
reference stiffness at P0 = 0 kN. This
confirmed the chosen limit of P0 =
50 kN for the destructive tests because
the post-tensioning resulted in a favour-
able increase of stiffness in these cases.
Secondly, this result confirmed that the
post-tensioning may reduce the stiff-
ness and destabilise the beam.
The beam twisted under the initial
cable load. Furthermore, it continued
twisting during bending (Fig. 4b). At a
critical load (wz = 10 mm in Fig. 4b) the
twist increased rapidly and the test was
stopped. Specimens 1 and 3 showed an
earlier torsional failure at P0 = 75 kN
and P0 = 100 kN, respectively (Fig. 4b).
The beam was stable up to larger bend-
ing loads for P0 = 0 kN and P0 = 50 kN.
Specimen 2 appeared to be more sta-
ble, with a constant twist at centre span
compared with specimens 1 and 3.
Finally, the cable load changed during
the bending process. Figure 5a shows
this effect for all specimens at differing
initial cable loads P0. In specimens 1 and
3, the cable load rose with an increasing
bending load while specimen 2 showed
the opposite trend (Table 2).
Destructive Bending
Bending of Full Cross-Section
(Destructive Test 1)
The non-destructive tests were fol-
lowed by destructive tests at a desig-
nated initial cable load of P0 = 50 kN.
Figure 6a (continuous lines) shows
the relation between vertical deflec-
tion and the resulting bending load.
The graph increases linearly up to
a maximal bending load of 80 kN in
specimens 1 and 3. In specimen 2, the
maximal load reached 72 kN after a
meaningful plateau. Afterwards, the
bending load dropped slightly until
Specimen 2 Specimen 3
5.561 3.186
0.042 0.070
0.099 0.166
Scientific Paper 105
(a) Cable load vs. piston travel Bending of Partial Broken Cross-
Section (Destructive Test 2)
100
Results of all non-destrutive tests Specimen 1
no values for specimen 1 P0 = 50 kN Specimen 2
Specimen 3 The dashed lines in Fig. 6 illustrate the
P0 = 0 kN
second loading of the partial broken
80

P0 = 50 kN
P0 = 75 kN cross-section and run below the contin-
P0 = 100 kN
Equ. 2 uous lines. The load-bearing behaviour
was equal to the unbroken situation
60
P (kN)

but at a lower load level (Table 3).

Finally, one or two panes failed leaving
40

one pane of glass unbroken in every

specimen.
20

The initial cable load during destruc-

tive tests at the broken cross-section
Evaluation range remained at the same level that was
0

intentionally set in the beginning

0 10 20 30 40 (Table 3). No considerable loss of cable
wP (mm)
load was recorded after the first failure.
(b) Twist vs. cable load During bending (see Fig.6a) a smaller
slope of the load-deflection curve was
0.001 0.002

Results of all non-destructive tests Specimen 1

Specimen 2 seen compared with destructive test 1.
Specimen 3 It reached a peak and dropped after-
P0 = 0 kN
P0 = 50 kN wards until final failure occurred.
P0 = 75 kN
0

P0 = 100 kN
Discussion
0.001
(rad)

Post-Tensioning
During the post-tensioning process,
the cable load introduces compressive
0.003

stress at the bottom glass edge and ten-

sile stress at the top edge. This behav-
iour was evaluated in Ref. [17]. The
0.005

given relation between the cable load

and the bending moment results in the
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 stress at the glass edge:
P (kN)

(c) Mean stress vs. cable load

10

Results of all non-destructive tests Specimen 1

Specimen 2
Specimen 3
P0 = 0 kN
5

P0 = 50 kN
P0 = 75 kN
Stress at top edge P0 = 100 kN
0

Equ. 1
mean (N/mm2)

Stress at bottom edge

e2,3 top
vy,top
5
10

S
y,v

12 34
(1)
15

vy,bottom
Evaluation range e14,bottom where
20

z,w P is cable load 0;

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Iy is the moment of inertial about
P (kN) strong axis of 8,640108 mm4;
z vertical coordinate where;
Fig. 3: Results of all non-destructive post-tensioning tests: (a) increase in cable load during
post-tensioning; (b) twist in the specimen during post-tensioning; (c) mean stress at bottom
z = h/2 bottom edge and z = h/2
and top glass edges during post-tensioning top edge;
L span of the beam of 9.000 mm;
a inclination of the cable at the
either one or two of the inner panes the cable load dropped partially until connector;
failed. The beam was unloaded for breakage. Specimen 2 showed a differ- t glass thickness of 12 mm;
inspection. ent behaviour. The maximal cable load h height of the glass cross section
Additionally, the maximal cable load occurred at wZ = 10 mm. After that of 600 mm and
occurred at the maximal bending load point, the cable load dropped signifi- A area of glass cross section of
in specimens 1 and 3 (Fig. 6b). Later, cantly until breakage occurred. 4th=2,880104 mm4.

106 Scientific Paper Structural Engineering International Nr. 2/2016

 (a) Bending load vs. vertical deflection It was concluded that an analytical eval-
uation in this stage remains usable for

100
Specimen 1
Specimen 2 preliminary design. Consequently, an
Specimen 3
P0 = 0 kN upscaling up to 9 m in span is feasible
80
P0 = 50 kN and confirms the results presented in
P0 = 75 kN
P0 = 100 kN Ref. [17].
In concrete structures, the cable loads
60
F (kN)

need to be checked precisely in order

to guarantee the effective pre-stress. In
40

this research this was achieved by meas-

uring the cable load directly and check-
ing the pressure of the hydraulic jack
20

simultaneously. In a post-calculation
the relation of cable load and piston
Evaluation range
travel was also determined. Figure 3a
0

0 5 10 15 20 shows a linear relation after stretch-

wz (mm) ing the cable, accommodating its dead
load. Specimen 2 shows a stiffer reac-
(b) Twist vs. vertical deflection tion compared with specimens 1 and 3.
0.03

Specimen 1
Specimen 2 The unbonded tendon is fixed at each
Specimen 3 end and at the connectors. This means
0.02

P0 = 0 kN
P0 = 50 kN that the strain of the cable needs to
P0 = 75 kN comply with the deflection of the
0.01

Initial twist after post-tesiong P0 = 100 kN

whole beam (compatibility condi-
tion). The total clamping path depends
0
(rad)

on the strain of the cable (Le), the

0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01

change in cable length due to the ver-

tical deflection of the beam (Lw) and
the compression of the glass (LG).
For specimen 2, Eq. (2) was derived
Evaluation range
assuming straight cables and neglect-
ing the effect of the cables dead load.
wP(P) = Le + Lw + LG
0 5 10 15 20
wz (mm)

Fig. 4: Results of all non-destructive bending tests: (a) increase in bending during displace-
ment controlled test; (b) twist in cross-section during bending

Compared with the results in Table 1 and beam theory in Eq. (1). The results for
Fig. 3b where values of 0.099 N/(mm2 kN) specimens 1 and 3 drift apart consider-
for specimen 2; 0.139 N/(mm2 kN) and ably at cable loads P > 80 kN. During
0.166 N/(mm2 kN) for specimens 1 and this stage (see Fig. 3b) the highest twist
3 are given, a deviation of 72%, 101% values were recorded, meaning that
and 120% is present. In terms of speci- additional bending about the minor axis
men 2, this is caused by the proximity of is present, which is not covered by the
(2)
the strain gauges to the connector that analytical model. However, during cable
causes a local stress field. This does not loads P < 60 kN the linear analytical
comply with the assumptions of linear result overlaps the experimental results. where

Specimen 1 Specimen 2 Specimen 3

P0_target (kN) 0 50 75 100 0 50 75 100 0 50 75 100
P0_actual (kN) 0 53.4 75.2 99.2 0 51.1 77.4 102.4 0 52.2 76.1 98.4
Fdec (kN) 0 16.4 26.4 33.6 0 16.4 21.2 26.8 0 16.4 26.8 35.6
Fmax (kN) 82.8 86.8 76.0 72.0 72.0 67.2 61.2 72.4 71.6 66.8 62.4
K (kN/mm) 4.99 5.12 5.15 4.94 4.94 5.00 4.74 4.16 5.12 5.21 5.21 4.83
P(wZ) (kN/mm) 0.216 0.766 0.899 0.998 0.776 0.670 0.440 0.363 0.641 0.822 0.847
Range K and P(wz) valid between 0 mm wZ 10 mm
Note. All results were recorded at 5 Hz. Slopes were calculated using a linear regression within the evaluation range where R2 is the coefficient of
determination.
Table 2: Results of non-destructive bending test, slope of function (R > 0.89)

Structural Engineering International Nr. 2/2016 Scientific Paper 107

 (a) Cable load vs. vertical deflection The same approach is applicable for
Specimen 1 specimens 1 and 3 with respect to
120
Evaluation range Specimen 2 their differing geometry. However, the
Specimen 3
P0 = 0 kN analytic result is 5.86 kN/mm as well.
100

P0 = 50 kN Comparing the results with the meas-

P0 = 75 kN
P0 = 100 kN ured results in Fig. 3a and Table 1, a
Equ. 3 smaller stiffness for specimens 1 and
80

3 was observed while the results for

P (kN)

specimen 2 differ by 5 % only. The

60

idealisation of the system causes the

deviation between the analytical and
40

the experimental results. Using linear

beam theory, Eq. (2) neglects the fol-
20

lowing aspects:
0

Additional shear deformation of the

0 5 10 15 20
wz (mm)
interlayer material due to tolerances
in laminated glass production, which
(b) Mean stress vs. vertical deflection (specimen 1) leads to loading of a single glass
P0 = 0 kN
pane in each two-layer packages
P0 = 50 kN Mean stress layer 14 Layers 1-4 (see Fig. 2 and Ref. [17]). This results
40

P0 = 75 kN
P0 = 100 kN in a decreased distance between the
Increasing twist
ends of the beam. It is suspected that
the edge tolerance in specimen 2 was
20

Stress at bottom edge

considerably smaller compared with
mean (N/mm2)

the other specimen, which leads to a

stiffer reaction.
0

Decompression of bottom edge 2,3 top

vy,top
This eccentric loading results in
bending and rotation about the
20

S
y,v minor axis. An increase in lateral
Stress at top edge
12 34 deflection because of this effect was
40

Resuld of all non-destructive tests vy,bottom reported in Refs. [7, 11] as well.
14,bottom
z,w The strain of the blocking material
0 5 10 15 20 was not taken into account. This
wz (mm) leads to an increased reduction in
the length of the glass structure
Fig. 5: Results of all non-destructive bending tests: (a) change in cable load during bending (LG). However, this deformation
at alternating initial cable loads; (b) mean stress at bottom and top edges of specimen 1 as is considerably smaller than the
an example at alternating initial cable loads strain of the cable and is considered
to have only a minor effect on the
system.
Specimen 1 Specimen 2 Specimen 3
As shown in Fig. 3b all beams
P0 (kN) 53.4 51.0 50.1
undergo lateral deflection, which is
Fmax.1 (kN) 78.8 71.6 80.8 not considered in the analysis. This
wz(Fmax.1) (mm) 14.84 26.13 15.07 will decrease the distance between
the anchors and the connectors,
Ffail.1 (kN) 74.4 71.2 75.6
which determines the length of the
wz.fail.1 (mm) 20.42 38.90 23.34 cable.
Failure pane no. 2 2 and 3 2 and 3 Equations (1) and (2) ignore the
Fmax.2 (kN) 66.00 43.60 52.40 dead load of the specimens.
wz(Fmax.2) (mm) 14.43 36.16 13.95
It is therefore concluded that the lat-
Ffail.2 (kN) 62.40 43.60 48.40
eral deflection influences the results,
wz.fail.2 (mm) 25.76 44.24 28.34 which needs to be studied in a more
Failure pane no. 3 and 4 4 1 precise numerical analysis by includ-
ing the local effects at the anchors and
Note. All results were recorded at 5 Hz. Slopes were calculated using a linear regression within the
evaluation range where R2 is the coefficient of determination. connectors. A linear elastic analytical
model is limited to the linear stage.
Table 3: Results of destructive bending tests
Bending
LP,0 length of the unloaded cable; LG change in cable length due Each beam was tensioned to an ini-
LP,w length of the loaded cable; deflection of the beam and tial cable load P0 for non-destructive
Le change in cable length due to NG(P) axial force in glass due to tests in order to observe the effect of
cable load; cable load < 0. cable load on the global load-bearing

108 Scientific Paper Structural Engineering International Nr. 2/2016

 (a) Bending load vs. vertical deflection the major and the minor axes (criti-
cal load). The beams tend to buckle.

100
Specimen 1 Failed panes:
Specimen 2 Additionally, the axial compressive
Specimen 3
Destructive test 1 s s
load from post-tensioning increases
80 Destructive test 2 this problem. Thus, an interaction of
Fmax 12 34 12 34

Ffail bending moment and axial load regard-

ing beneficial stress in the glass as well
60

as unwanted non-linear deformational

F (kN)

s s
behaviour was observed.
40

12 34 12 34

As the cable is fixed to the beam, the

cable load P and the external bend-
ing load F interdependthe internal
20

s s
system is statically indeterminate. To
12 34 12 34
handle this analytically, one has to split
the system into a determined part and
0

0 10 20 30 40 50 an additional unknown element X1,

wz (mm) which is equivalent to the change in
cable load during bending, according
(b) Cable load vs. time to Fig. 5a. By formulating the compat-
ibility condition d i = 0 and using the
70

energy theorem, the problem can be

solved (Eq. (3) and Fig. 7)
60
P (kN)
50

(3)

Specimen 1
where
40

Specimen 2
Specimen 3
Destructive test 1
Destructive test 2
Mi,j is the bending moment and Ni,j is
Fmax the axial force with i = 0 determined
30

Ffail part and j = 1 indetermined part.

0 10 20 30 40 50 This approach results in the change in
t (s)
the cable load during bending. Before
Fig. 6: Load-bearing behaviour during destructive bending tests: (a) bending load vs. glass failure, the stiffness remains
travelling of crossbeam; (b) cable load during bending unchanged which allows for a linear
superposition with the initial cable
F/2 F/2 Properties of the cable: load P0:
Proprties of glass section;
EG = 70000 N/mm2 EP = 160000 N/mm2
h = 600

IG = 8,640 108 mm4 IP 0 P(F) = P0 + X1

AG = 2,880 104 mm2 AP = 452 mm2
3000 3000
= P0 + 0.27 (kN/kN) F(wz) (4)
F/2 F/2 L = 9000
where
X1 X1 P is the cable load and F(wz) =
i = 0
5.0 kN/mm (mean value from Table 2).
N1 = X1cos() NP1 = x1
M0 (FL) M1 (X1L) Specimen 2 showed a minor twist at cen-
1/6 + sin()/3
tre span compared with the other two
Fig. 7: Static system for the calculation of the change in cable load. Primary system (left) beams. This is because the maximal twist
and in-determined part (right) where di marks the compatibility condition. The same did not happen at centre span as a result
approach for specimen 2 results in the same increase in cable load after two significant of the chosen construction. Observing
digits the loading process with the naked eye
unveiled the fact that the lateral deflec-
behaviour of the beams. An initial indication for lateral torsional buckling. tion in the first and last third of the beam
compressive stress at the bottom edge At vertical deflection between 10 mm length is considerably higher and in
caused by the initial cable load is fully and 15 mm Fig. 3b depicts the largest opposite directions (Fig. 8). Thus, the lat-
dissipated during all non-destructive twist for options of P0 = 100 kN and eral shape shows four curves, accom-
bending tests. Table 2 presents the 75 kN. At higher cable loads, the beam modates at centre span and is recorded
dedicated decompression loads, Fdec. destabilises, which leads to an earlier as near-zero at this location. One study
Thus, with a larger cable load, an lateral failure. The mean stress during measured the lateral deflection at several
increase in ultimate load was expected. bending, changes in a linear fashion intermediate points at the top and bot-
However, during non-destructive (Fig. 5b). The stress drifts apart and tom cords and explained that the lateral
bending, a twist in the cross-section was signals an increasing twist in the cross- displacement appears to be maximal at
observed and this result was used as an section due to double bending about the centre.11

Structural Engineering International Nr. 2/2016 Scientific Paper 109

Ultimate Load and Breakage Pattern
Table 3 summarises the failure loads
of all beams. The failure occurs after a
considerable lateral deflection without
an increase in bending load.
One or two of the four glass panes
break leaving at least half the cross-
section intact. The first failure origi-
nates at the centre span of specimen 2
and specimen 3. In specimen 1, the
first crack occurred at the connector
about 50 mm from the edge of the steel
(Fig. 9 (left)). The first crack initiated
at the same level of loading as in speci-
men 3; thus, the adhesive joining of the
connector does not have any signifi-
cant influence on the breakage of the
glass, which shows that this is a work-
able structural solution.
A loss in stiffness and ultimate break-
age load of 25% for each broken glass
Fig. 8: Lateral deflection in specimen 2; reference continuous line is shown in orange
(a)
Connector
Fig. 9: Breakage pattern of specimen 1 after first loading (destructive test 1)
Specimen 1
Fmax.2/Fmax.1 83.7%
Ffail.2/Ffail.1 83.9%
Expected loss Pane no. 2 broke
100 25% = 75%
Neglected capacity 8.78.9%
Table 4: Loss of stiffness, maximal bending load and failure load
110 Scientific Paper
pane was expected. A broken pane of
glass is considered to be non-existent in
calculation. This approach neglects the
capability of compressive load transfer
of the broken glass pane. Therefore,
this approach remains on the safe side.
The neglected load-bearing capacity
in the compressed broken glass results
from a comparison of the expected
loss with the actual loss in failure load.
Table 4 compares failure loads and
maximal loads during the first and sec-
ond destructive tests. In all cases, the
recorded loss is 8.714.8% higher than
the expected values because parts of
the heat-strengthened glass remained
intact and shared part of the total load
via the interlayer material and via the
compressed part of the broken cross-
section as previously discussed for rein-
forced glass beams.2,4,5 A reliable load
share factor of the broken glass could
(b)
Specimen 2
60.9%
61.2%
Panes no. 2 and 3 broke
100 50% = 50%
10.911.2%
Structural Engineering International Nr. 2/2016
not be provided during this study, but
can be a future research topic.
After destructive test 2, three out of
four panes in each beam were bro-
ken (Fig. 6a). Furthermore, the fully
broken glass packages suffered from
large deflection during the hours after
the test, without falling apart. The bro-
ken fragments were connected by the
interlayer material, which is known
to have considerably larger deforma-
tional capacity compared with glass,
especially regarding the high room
temperatures during the test. However,
the beam remained in place due to the
intact cable.
The effect of the cable on the struc-
ture was the centre of this investiga-
tion. An increase in cable load during
the test was observed showing that the
cable carries part of the total load, thus
releasing the glass. Additionally, during
the second destructive test, the cable
carried a larger proportion of the total
load due to the loss in stiffness in the
glass cross-section. Overall, the cable
provides a reliable, redundant way of
load transfer in the glass beam.
However, specimen 2 shows a drop in
cable load before failure (Fig. 6b). The
shape of distortion causes this effect as
the deflection governs the cable force
in an unbonded system. The connec-
tors of specimens 1 and 3 are supported
laterally, while they are free to deflect
in specimen 2. It may be argued that a
three-point bending test for specimen 2
may be more effective. Nevertheless,
four-point bending tests were chosen
in order to compare all results.
Summary of Results
Post-tensioning of large-span glass
beams is feasible and was described in
an analytical way in this preliminary
study. This research shows the limits
of an analytical solution. An advanced
option will be to consider a detailed
three-dimensional numerical model
that includes the properties of lami-
nated glass and local effects such as an
unaligned load transfer onto the glass
edge. This requires further analysis
in order to provide reliable tools for
Specimen 3
64.8%
64.0%
Panes no. 2 and 3 broke
100 50% = 50%
14.014.8%
design. During bending, the beneficial
compressive stress at the beams bot-
tom edge needs to be decompressed
first before an actual tensile bending
stress may cause the breakage of glass
in future research. The axial compres-
sive load caused an unwanted extra
buckling problem. Thus, the design
engineer needs to find an optimal rela-
tion for axial load and bending load in
a similar building project.
Before the glass breaks, the beams
twisted extensively until a part of the
cross-section failed. During a second
loading of the beam, the experimen-
tal data showed a larger load-bearing
capacity than expected from a simpli-
fied analytical approach. Finally, the
cable offered a reliable way of load
transfer and partly bears the total load
with the glass. Thus, this evaluation
shows that the studied method is suit-
able to construct redundant and safe
glass beams.
Bridge Design
Design and Overall Concept
The aim of this research was to extend
the span of Spannglass beams and
show its applicability. Post-tensioned
steel cables relieve the glass edge from
unwanted tensile stress and accommo-
date dead-load deflection. To prove
this, it was decided to build a single-
span, simply supported pedestrian
bridge as a mock-up for Glasstec 2014
in Dsseldorf, Germany (Fig. 10). Two
9 m long glass beams, similar to speci-
mens 1 and 3, form the main girder of
the bridge. A balustrade rail was fixed
on top of the bearing as well as on top
of the connectors, giving space for a
walk-on glazing and a glass balustrade.
Commercially available standard prod-
ucts were used intentionally to avoid
specific complex solutions (see Table 5).
While glass bridges are relatively rare
structures, Spannglass beams may be
used as facade mullions or as roofs,
making use of a flexible cross-section
design, which allows for individual con-
figuration of the cables (see structural
options in Refs. [17, 18]). Therefore,
it was decided to demonstrate the
implementation of a glazed roof (left
part in Fig. 10) and a limited bridge
deck at the first one-third of the total
span (right part in Fig. 10). From the
remaining balcony, the visitors were
able to look at the whole bridge as well
as the surrounding exhibition area.
The safety in use concept of the
Messe Dsseldorf, Germany, required
Structural Engineering International Nr. 2/2016
a full static proof according to German Fabrication and Installation
standards. German code DIN 18008
The Spannglass beams were prefab-
requires the use of approved products
ricated in the factory. The glass pack-
to provide verification of ultimate limit
ages as well as the cable were mounted
state and serviceability of the walk-on
on the steel bearing. The cables were
glazing and the balustrade.23 The beams
mounted straight from one end to
were non-standardised products that
the other through the narrow margin
required an experimental structural
between the glass packages in order
certification as described above. The
to align their ends. This was the posi-
maximal bending load from the study
tion required to connect both pack-
was used to estimate an ultimate design
ages adhesively. For this, the steel
load for the bridge project. While there
connectors as well as the glass were
was a lack of safety factors for glass
cleaned (Fig. 11 (left)) and the bond-
beams and an insufficient number of
ing device PTFE was placed onto
specimens for adequate statistical infer-
the glass edges. A constant joint thick-
ence, the characteristic load value for
ness was thus guaranteed. After apply-
each beam was negotiated. The discus-
ing the two-component adhesive on
sion resulted in a value of 68 kN, which
the steel surfaces (Fig. 11 (centre)), the
is 15% lower than the lowest failure
connectors were placed and the sur-
load of specimen 1. Together with a
plus adhesive material flowing out of
limitation on the number of pedestrians
the joint seam was removed (Fig. 11
on the bridge, the safety of the structure
(right)). This quality feature guaran-
was proved successfully.
teed a bubble-free joint. The cable was
Altogether, the level of safety meets installed in its final position along the
the standards of a public structure and deviators after curing of the adhesive
ensures the applicability of the struc- and tensioning them as needed. This
tural concept in reality. resulted in a Spannglass beam ready
Fig. 10: The 9 m Spannglass bridge at Glasstec 2014 in Dsseldorf, Germany. The final
cable layout matches specimens 1 and 3. Photocredits:Messe Dsseldorf/Tillmann
Structural element Size (mm2) Glass
Girders 9000 600 Laminated safety glass from heat-strengthened
glass 2 2 10 mm
Walk-on glazing 2870 1654 Laminated safety glass from 10 mm fully tem-
pered and 2 12 mm heat-strengthened glass
Balustrade 1661 1147 Laminated safety glass from 2 10 mm fully
2852 1147 tempered glass
Staircase steps 1240 270 Laminated safety glass from 8 mm fully temper-
ed and 2 10 mm heat-strengthened glass
Staircase balustrade 3500 1147 Laminated safety glass from 2 10 mm fully
tempered glass
Roof glazing 5970 1714 Laminated safety glass from 2 10 mm fully
tempered glass
Table 5: Sizing of main structural elements of the Spannglass bridge
Scientific Paper 111
(a)
Fig. 11: Bonding of the steel connectors. Cleaning and preparation of the surfaces (left); application of the adhesive (centre) and
positioning on the glass edge where spacers were used as a bonding device (right)
Fig. 12: Spannglass bridge for pedestrian bridge design competition at the IABSE
Conference 2015 in Nara, Japan.20 The international jury awarded the bridge design with
the Outstanding Design Award (First prize)
to be installed. Additionally, a test
installation of the whole bridge was
performed before shipping the parts
to Dsseldorf.
Outlook: Future Bridge Design
Options
The 2014 IABSE conference in Nara,
Japan, hosted a bridge design compe-
tition. One of the entries was a deck
bridge with a smooth curved flat
arch-like structure for a bridge across
the 26 m Saho River in Nara, Japan
(Fig. 12). A highly slender structure, 0.3
m high at centre span and 1.1 m high
at the ends was achieved using two
Spannglass beams made from three
sections, each forming the main load-
bearing structure. Each beam is made
of two packages of heat-strengthened
laminated glass at a distance of 80 mm
to each other. The gap is used to guide
a 20 mm steel cable post-tensioned to
150 kN to accommodate the tensile
stress and deflection from dead load.
112 Scientific Paper
(b)
Technology and was executed with the help
Both packages are interconnected by
stainless steel connectors, which are
adhesively bonded to the glass edge.
They redirect the cable, take on the
steel frame holding the segmented
glass balustrades as well as the walk-
on glass deck and prevent a contact
between the two glass packages. The
deck forms an arch of walk-on glaz-
ing covered with anti-skid surface. This
ensured that pedestrians as well as
rolling users may use the connection.20
Conclusion and Summary
During this study, the complete design
process of an innovative glass beam
concept with post-tensioned reinforce-
ment leading to a pedestrian bridge
was described. The bridge consisted
of a glass balustrade, glass bridge deck
and two 9 m Spannglass beams. After
several design studies, the final option
emerged and was prepared for struc-
tural analysis. Balustrades and walk-
on glazing were detailed analytically
Structural Engineering International Nr. 2/2016
(c)
according to the German code DIN
18008 while an experimental study was
necessary to determine the ultimate
load of the main beams. An experi-
mental prototype study with three full-
size beams yielded the analytical and
experimental description of the load-
bearing behaviour. Finally, the whole
bridge was erected and displayed at
Glasstec 2014 in Dsseldorf.
The overall finding is the load-bearing
behaviour, which is necessary for pre-
liminary design of similar structures.
Additionally, upscaling of Spannglass
beams to 9 m is possible and can be
described using the proposed analytical
methods. This provides a novel option
for transparent structures.
Acknowledgements
The scientific project was sponsored by the
German Federal Ministry of Economics and
of THIELE Glas Werk GmbH (Wermsdorf,
Germany) and KL-MEGLA GmbH (Eitorf,
Germany). Furthermore, PFEIFER Seil- und
Hebetechnik GmbH (Memmingen, Germany)
gave valuable support. Additionally, we
acknowledge the valuable technical support
of Friedrich-Siemens-Laboratorium and
Otto Mohr Labor of Technische Universitt
Dresden.
References
[1] Weller B, Meier A, Weimar T, Menkenhagen
J., Koschecknick K. Hybride Glastrger als
Fassadenelemente. In Stahlbau Spezial kon-
struktiver Glasbau. Wiley-VCH Verlag, 2010;
pp. 4145. doi:10.1002/stab.201001306
[2] Louter C. Fragile yet Ductile. Structural
Aspects of Reinforced Glass Beams. Dissertation,
Delft University of Technology, TU Delft, The
Netherlands, 2011.
[3] Bos FP, Veer FA, Hobbelmann GJ, Louter
PC. Stainless steel reinforced and post-tensioned
glass beams. In Proceedings of ICEM12 12th
International Conference on Experimental
Mechanics, Politecnico di Bari, Italy, 29 August
2 September, 2004.
[4] Louter PC, van Heusden JF, Veer FA,
Vambersky JNJA, de Boer HR, Versteegen J.
Post-tensioned glass beams. In Proceedings of
16th European Conference of Fracture ECF16,
Alexandroupolis, Greece, 37 July, 2006.
[5] Louter C, Belis J, Veer F, Lebet J-P. Structural
response of SG-laminated reinforced glass
beams; experimental investigations on the
effects of glass type, reinforcement percentage
and beam size. Eng. Struct. 2012; 36: 292301.
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.12.016
[6] Louter C, Prez A, Jordan T, Lebet J-P. Post-
tensioned structural glass beams Experimental
investigations. In Proceedings of COST Action
TU 905, Mid-term Conference on Structural
Glass 2013, Pore, Croatia, pp 277284.
[7] Louter C, Cupac J, Lebet J-P. Exploratory
experimental investigations on post-tensioned
structural glass beams. J. Facade Des. Eng. 2014;
2: 318. doi:10.3233/FDE-130012
[8] Cupac J, Louter C. Post-tensioned structural
glass beams comparative experimental study.
In: Advanced Building Skins 2015 Conference
Proceedings. Published by Englhardt, O. Graz,
2015, pp. 166-172 (draft publication).
[9] Jordo S, Pinho M, Martins JP, Santiago A,
Cruz PJS. Numerical modelling of a laminated
beam reinforced with pre-stressed cables. In
Proceedings of Challenging Glass 4 & COST
Action TU0905 Final Conference 2014, Lausanne,
Switzerland, pp. 253260.
IABSE Publications
Digitised Archive
from 1929-1999
Did you know?
IABSE publications between 1929 - 1999 can be downloaded for FREE
from the IABSE Archive on the internet - by everyone.
Structural Engineering International Nr. 2/2016
[10] Jordo S, Pinho M, Martins JP, Santiago
A, Neves LC. Behaviour of laminated glass
beams reinforced with pre-stressed cables.
Steel Construct. 2014; 7: 204207. doi:10.1002/
stco.201410027
[11] Firmo F, Jordo S, Neves L-C, Ferreira C-A,
Goncalves A-C. Structural behaviour of simple
and pre-stressed hybrid steel-glass beams. In
Proceedings of RehabStructures 2015, Azores,
Portugal.
[12] Froli M, Lani L. Glass tensegrity trusses.
Struct. Eng. Int. 2010; 4: 436441.
[13] Froli M, Mamone V. A 12 meter long seg-
mented, post-tensioned steel-glass beam (TVT
Gamma). In Proceedings of Challenging Glass 4
& COST Action TU0905 Final Conference 2014,
Lausanne, Switzerland, pp. 243251.
[14] Achenbach J. Glass skeleton construction
with compound glass tubes. In Detail Practice
Translucent Materials, Kaltenbach F. Birkhuser
Verlag GmbH, 2004; pp. 2729.
[15] Schober H, Gerber H, Schneider J. Ein
Glashaus fr die Therme in Badenweiler. In
Stahlbau 73. Wiley-VCH Verlag, 2004; pp 886
892. doi:10.1002/stab.200490213
[16] Weller B, Engelmann M. Novel reinforced
spannglass beams. In Proceedings of Glass
Performance Days, Tampere, Finland, 2013, pp.
282284.
Do full text searches in any part of the papers, or browse
by title, author or year.
Explore the Archive with over 80'000 pages and find a treasure
of information on research, projects and IABSE.
www.iabse.org/IABSE/Publications/Archive
PS: Conference Papers published after 1999 (over 3'500) are available via Ingenta.
Full Papers may be downloaded with a subscription or on a pay per view basis.
www.ingentaconnect.com/content/iabse
[17] Weller B, Engelmann M. Deformation of
spannglass beams subject to post-tensioning. In
Proceedings of Challenging Glass 4 & COST
Action TU0905 Final Conference, Lausanne,
Switzerland, 2014, pp. 285294.
[18] Weller B, Engelmann M. Spannglastrger
Glastrger mit vorgespannter Bewehrung.
In Glasbau 2014, Weller B, Tasche S. Ernst &
Sohn: Berlin, 2014; pp. 193203. doi:10.1002/
stab.201490059
[19] Weller B, Engelmann M. An innovative con-
cept for pre-stressed glass beams. In Proceedings
of IABSE Conference, Nara, 2015; pp. 132133.
CD-ROM Full Paper.
[20] Engelmann M. Spannglass-Bridge.
Footbridge-design competition contribution. In
Young Engineers Workshop at IABSE Conference
Nara, 2015. doi:10.13140/RG.2.1.4379.2480
[21] Ebert J. Einleitung hoher Lasten in
Glaskanten Ein Beitrag zum Einsatz von
Kunststoffen als Klotzungsmaterial. Dissertation.
Technische Universitt Dresden, 2014
[22] EN 1288-3. Glass in Building Determination
of the Bending Strength of Glass. Part 3: Test with
Specimen Supported at Two Points (Four Point
Bending). Beuth: Berlin, 2000.
[23] DIN 18008. Glass in Building Design and
Construction Rules. Parts 15. Beuth: Berlin,
20102013.
Scientific Paper 113