DOCSLIB.ORG

Arched Bridges

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arched Bridges University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Honors Theses and Capstones Student Scholarship Spring 2012 Arched Bridges Lily Beyer University of New Hampshire - Main Campus Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/honors Part of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Beyer, Lily, "Arched Bridges" (2012). Honors Theses and Capstones. 33. https://scholars.unh.edu/honors/33 This Senior Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses and Capstones by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE CIVIL ENGINEERING Arched Bridges History and Analysis Lily Beyer 5/4/2012 An exploration of arched bridges design, construction, and analysis through history; with a case study of the Chesterfield Brattleboro Bridge. UNH Civil Engineering Arched Bridges Lily Beyer Contents Contents ..................................................................................................................................... i List of Figures ........................................................................................................................... ii Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter I: History of Arched Bridges ....................................................................................... 3 What is an Arch .................................................................................................................... 3 Arch Forms ........................................................................................................................... 7 Roman Arches ....................................................................................................................... 9 Middle Ages ........................................................................................................................ 11 Asian Bridges ...................................................................................................................... 14 Steel Arches ........................................................................................................................ 15 Reinforced Concrete ........................................................................................................... 18 Chapter II: Design of an Arch ................................................................................................. 27 Shape of the Arch................................................................................................................ 27 Arch Ribs ............................................................................................................................ 29 Behavior under load ............................................................................................................ 34 Construction ........................................................................................................................ 37 Chapter III: Analysis of an Arch ............................................................................................. 42 Three-pinned Arch Analysis ............................................................................................... 43 Two-pinned Arch Analysis ................................................................................................. 50 Influence Line to Reaction .................................................................................................. 58 Chapter IV: Chesterfield Brattleboro Bridge Analysis ........................................................... 59 History of the Bridge .......................................................................................................... 59 Analysis............................................................................................................................... 61 Dead Load ........................................................................................................................... 66 Live Load ............................................................................................................................ 71 Axial Force.......................................................................................................................... 73 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 75 Bibliography ........................................................................................................................... 77 i UNH Civil Engineering Arched Bridges Lily Beyer List of Figures Figure 1: Forces in an arch ........................................................................................................ 3 Figure 2: Arched beam.............................................................................................................. 4 Figure 3: Corbelled Arch .......................................................................................................... 4 Figure 4: Arch End Conditions ................................................................................................. 5 Figure 5: Steel hinge at the end of an arch at UNH’s Wittemore Center ................................. 6 Figure 6: Mike O'Callaghan - Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge ................................................... 6 Figure 7: Typical Barrel Arch ................................................................................................... 7 Figure 8: Arched Bridge, Westford MA ................................................................................... 7 Figure 9: Typical Arch-Deck Bridge ........................................................................................ 8 Figure 10: Robert Maillart's Bridge at Salginatobel ................................................................. 8 Figure 11: Typical Tied Arch Bridge........................................................................................ 9 Figure 12: Sydney Harbor Bridge ............................................................................................. 9 Figure 13: Pont du Gard Aqueduct ......................................................................................... 10 Figure 14: Ponte Rotto in Rome ............................................................................................. 11 Figure 15: Pont d'Avignon ...................................................................................................... 12 Figure 16: Section of a Gothic Cathedral ............................................................................... 13 Figure 17: Bridge at Neuilly by Perronet ................................................................................ 13 Figure 18: Zhaozhuo Bridge ................................................................................................... 15 Figure 19: Ironbridge .............................................................................................................. 16 Figure 20: Garabit Viaduct ..................................................................................................... 17 Figure 21: Västerbron (West Bridge) in Stockholm ............................................................... 18 Figure 22: Hennebique system for reinforced concrete .......................................................... 19 Figure 23: Stauffacher Bridge by Maillart ............................................................................. 20 Figure 24: Hollow Arch System by Maillart .......................................................................... 21 Figure 25: Tavanasa Bridge by Maillart ................................................................................. 22 Figure 26: Schwandbach Bridge ............................................................................................. 23 Figure 27: Tunkhannock Viaduct ........................................................................................... 24 Figure 28: Plougastel Bridge .................................................................................................. 25 Figure 29: Krk Island Bridges................................................................................................. 26 Figure 30: Hanging chain forming a catenary shape .............................................................. 28 Figure 31: Three types of arches, with varying rib thickness ................................................. 30 Figure 32: Maillart's bridge at Vessy - note the variation in rib depth ................................... 31 Figure 33: Pinned Abutment Connection for Truss Bridge .................................................... 32 Figure 34: Steel hinges in concrete arch ................................................................................. 32 Figure 35: Reinforced concrete hinge at springing of Salginatobel Bridge ............................ 33 ii UNH Civil Engineering Arched Bridges Lily Beyer Figure 36: Imperfectly fitted arches, resulting in pinned behavior ......................................... 34 Figure 37: Arch bending under unbalanced load .................................................................... 35 Figure 38: Actions of a deck
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Suspension Bridges
    Types of Bridges What are bridges used for? What bridges have you seen in real life? Where were they? Were they designed for people to walk over? Do you know the name and location of any famous bridges? Did you know that there is more than one type of design for bridges? Let’s take a look at some of them. Suspension Bridges A suspension bridge uses ropes, chains or cables to hold the bridge in place. Vertical cables are spaced out along the bridge to secure the deck area (the part that you walk or drive over to get from one side of the bridge to the other). Suspension bridges can cover large distances. Large pillars at either end of the waterways are connected with cables and the cables are secured, usually to the ground. Due to the variety of materials and the complicated design, suspension bridges are very expensive to build. Suspension Bridges The structure of suspension bridges has changed throughout the years. Jacob’s Creek Bridge in Pennsylvania was built in 1801. It was the first suspension bridge to be built using wrought iron chain suspensions. It was 21 metres long. If one single link in a chain is damaged, it weakens the whole chain which could lead to the collapse of the bridge. For this reason, wire or cable is used in the design of suspension bridges today. Even though engineer James Finlay promised that the bridge would stay standing for 50 years, it was damaged in 1825 and replaced in 1833. Suspension Bridges Akashi Kaiko Bridge, Japan The world’s longest suspension bridge is the Akashi Kaikyo Bridge in Japan.
    [Show full text]
  • Bridges and Applications Bridges and Applications Bridges and Applications Arch Bridges
    10/23/2014 Bridges and Applications Bridges and Applications • Bridges are used to span across distances that are difficult to otherwise pass through. • Rivers • Deep gorges • Other roadways Bridges and Applications Arch Bridges • There are four basic types of bridges – Arch – Beam – Suspension – Cable‐stayed • Each type has different design and is therefore better suited to different applications 1 10/23/2014 Arch Bridges Arch Bridges • Instead of pushing straight down, the weight of an arch bridge is carried outward along the curve of the arch to the supports at each end. Abutments, carry • These supports, called the abutments, carry the load the load and keep the ends of the bridge from spreading outward. and keep the ends of the bridge from spreading outward Arch Bridges Arch Bridges • When supporting its own weight and the • Today, materials like steel and pre‐stressed weight of crossing traffic, every part of the concrete have made it possible to build longer arch is under compression. and more elegant arches. • For this reason, arch bridges must be made of materials that are strong under compression. New River Gorge, – Rock West Virginia. – Concrete 2 10/23/2014 Arch Bridges Arch Bridges • Usually arch bridges employ vertical supports • Typically, arch bridges span between 200 and called spandrels to distribute the weight of 800 feet. the roadway to the arch below. Arch Bridges One of the most revolutionary arch bridges in recent years is the Natchez Trace Parkway Bridge in Franklin, Tennessee, which was opened to traffic in 1994. It's the first American arch bridge to be constructed from segments of precast concrete, a highly economical material.
    [Show full text]
  • Simple Innovative Comparison of Costs Between Tied-Arch Bridge and Cable-Stayed Bridge
    MATEC Web of Conferences 258, 02015 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20192 5802015 SCESCM 20 18 Simple innovative comparison of costs between tied-arch bridge and cable-stayed bridge Järvenpää Esko1,*, Quach Thanh Tung2 1WSP Finland, Oulu, Finland 2WSP Finland, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam Abstract. The proposed paper compares tied-arch bridge alternatives and cable-stayed bridge alternatives based on needed load-bearing construction material amounts in the superstructure. The comparisons are prepared between four tied arch bridge solutions and four cable-stayed bridge solutions of the same span lengths. The sum of the span lengths is 300 m. The rise of arch as well as the height of pylon and cable arrangements follow optimal dimensions. The theoretic optimum rise of tied-arch for minimum material amount is higher than traditionally used for aesthetic reason. The optimum rise for minimum material amount parabolic arch is shown in the paper. The mathematical solution uses axial force index method presented in the paper. For the tied-arches the span-rise-ration of 3 is used. The hangers of the tied-arches are vertical-The tied-arches are calculated by numeric iteration method in order to get moment-less arch. The arches are designed as constant stress arch. The area and the weight of the cross section follow the compression force in the arch. In addition the self-weight of the suspender cables are included in the calculation. The influence of traffic loads are calculated by using a separate FEM program. It is concluded that tied-arch is a competitive alternative to cable-stayed bridge especially when asymmetric bridge spans are considered.
    [Show full text]
  • Visit Ohio's Historic Bridges
    SPECIAL ADVERTISING SECTION Visit Ohio’s Historic Bridges Historic and unique bridges have a way of sticking in our collective memories. Many of us remember the bridge we crossed walking to school, a landmark on the way to visit relatives, the gateway out of town or a welcoming indication that you are back in familiar territory. The Ohio Department of Transportation, in collaboration with the Ohio Historic Bridge Association, Ohio History Connection’s State Historic Preservation Office, TourismOhio and historicbridges.org, has assembled a list of stunning bridges across the state that are well worth a journey. Ohio has over 500 National Register-listed and historic bridges, including over 150 wooden covered bridges. The following map features iron, steel and concrete struc- tures, and even a stone bridge built when canals were still helping to grow Ohio’s economy. Some were built for transporting grain to market. Other bridges were specifically designed to blend into the scenic landscape of a state or municipal park. Many of these featured bridges are Ohio Historic Bridge Award recipients. The annual award is given to bridge owners and engineers that rehabilitate, preserve or reuse historic structures. The awards are sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration, ODOT and Ohio History Connection’s State Historic Preservation Office. Anthony Wayne Bridge - Toledo, OH Ohio Department of Transportation SPECIAL ADVERTISING SECTION 2 17 18 SOUTHEAST REGION in eastern Ohio, Columbiana County has Metropark’s Huntington Reservation on the community. A project that will rehabilitate several rehabilitated 1880’s through truss shore of Lake Erie along US 6/Park Drive.
    [Show full text]
  • Arched Bridges Lily Beyer University of New Hampshire - Main Campus
    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Honors Theses and Capstones Student Scholarship Spring 2012 Arched Bridges Lily Beyer University of New Hampshire - Main Campus Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/honors Part of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Beyer, Lily, "Arched Bridges" (2012). Honors Theses and Capstones. 33. https://scholars.unh.edu/honors/33 This Senior Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses and Capstones by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE CIVIL ENGINEERING Arched Bridges History and Analysis Lily Beyer 5/4/2012 An exploration of arched bridges design, construction, and analysis through history; with a case study of the Chesterfield Brattleboro Bridge. UNH Civil Engineering Arched Bridges Lily Beyer Contents Contents ..................................................................................................................................... i List of Figures ........................................................................................................................... ii Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter I: History
    [Show full text]
  • Bayonne Bridge Lesson Plan
    The Bayonne Bridge: The Beautiful Arch Resources for Teachers and Students [Printable and Electronic Versions] The Bayonne Bridge: The Beautiful Arch Resources for Teachers And Students [Printable and Electronic Versions] OVERVIEW/OBJECTIVE: Students will be able to understand and discuss the history of NOTES: the Bayonne Bridge and use science and engineering basics • Key words indicated in to investigate bridge design and test an arch bridge model. Bold are defined in call- out boxes. TARGET GRADE LEVEL: • Teacher-only text Fourth grade instruction, adaptable to higher levels as indicated with Italics. desired in the subjects of Social Studies and Engineering. FOCUS: In Part I, students learn about history of the Bayonne Bridge including the many engineering challenges encountered during the project and the people who helped overcome those challenges. In Part II, students learn engineering concepts to understand how bridges stay up and use these concepts to complete activities on bridge design before applying these concepts to theorize how the Bayonne Bridge works. MATERIALS: • Part I: DVD of “The Bayonne Bridge Documentary” • Part II: 2–4 heavy textbooks or 2 bricks per group; 2 pieces of “cereal box” cardboard or similar, 12 x 8 in; weights (anything small that can be stacked on the structure); red and blue marker, crayon or colored pencil for each student or group. The Bayonne Bridge: The Beautiful Arch Contents Teacher Materials | Part I: History of the Bayonne Bridge . T-1 Teacher Materials | Part II: Bridge Engineering . T-7 Student Materials | Part I: History of the Bayonne Bridge . S-1 Student Materials | Part II: Bridge Engineering .
    [Show full text]
  • CS 467 Risk Management and Structural Assessment of Concrete Deck Hinge Structures
    Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Highway Structures & Bridges Inspection & Assessment CS 467 Risk management and structural assessment of concrete deck hinge structures (formerly BA 93/09) Revision 1 Summary The use of this document enables the safety and serviceability of concrete hinge deck structures to be assessed and managed, allowing to manage risks and maintain a safe and operational network. Application by Overseeing Organisations Any specific requirements for Overseeing Organisations alternative or supplementary to those given in this document are given in National Application Annexes to this document. Feedback and Enquiries Users of this document are encouraged to raise any enquiries and/or provide feedback on the content and usage of this document to the dedicated Highways England team. The email address for all enquiries and feedback is: [email protected] This is a controlled document. CS 467 Revision 1 Contents Contents Release notes 3 Foreword 4 Publishing information . 4 Contractual and legal considerations . 4 Introduction 5 Background . 5 Assumptions made in the preparation of this document . 5 Abbreviations and symbols 6 Terms and definitions 7 1. Scope 8 Aspects covered . 8 Implementation . 8 Use of GG 101 . 8 2. Risk management process and prioritisation 9 Risk management report . 11 Initial review . 11 Risk assessment for structural assessment . 11 Structural review . 12 Structural assessment . 12 Risk assessment for management . 12 Management plan . 12 Prioritisation of deck hinge structures . 12 3. Initial review 13 4. Risk assessment for structural assessment 14 Risk assessment . 14 Primary risks . 14 Condition risk . 15 Structural risk . 15 Secondary risks . 15 Consequential risk . 16 Vulnerable details risk .
    [Show full text]
  • G 13.1 Guidelines for Steel Girder Bridge Analysis.Pdf
    G13.1 Guidelines for Steel Girder Bridge Analysis 2nd Edition American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials National Steel Bridge Alliance AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge Collaboration Copyright © 2014 by the AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge Collaboration All rights reserved. ii G13.1 Guidelines for Steel Girder Bridge Analysis PREFACE This document is a standard developed by the AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge Collaboration. The primary goal of the Collaboration is to achieve steel bridge design and construction of the highest quality and value through standardization of the design, fabrication, and erection processes. Each standard represents the consensus of a diverse group of professionals. It is intended that Owners adopt and implement Collaboration standards in their entirety to facilitate the achievement of standardization. It is understood, however, that local statutes or preferences may prevent full adoption of the document. In such cases Owners should adopt these documents with the exceptions they feel are necessary. Cover graphics courtesy of HDR Engineering. DISCLAIMER The information presented in this publication has been prepared in accordance with recognized engineering principles and is for general information only. While it is believed to be accurate, this information should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent professional examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability, and applicability by a licensed professional engineer, designer, or architect. The publication of the material contained herein is not intended as a representation or warranty of the part of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) or the National Steel Bridge Alliance (NSBA) or of any other person named herein, that this information is suitable for any general or particular use or of freedom from infringement of any patent or patents.
    [Show full text]
  • Northumberland Strait Crossing: Design Development of Precast Prestressed Bridge Structure
    PRECAST CONCRETE SOLVES 100-YEAR-OLD PROBLEM Northumberland Strait Crossing: Design Development of Precast Prestressed Bridge Structure The authors describe the design development process of the $840 million (Canadian dollars) Northumberland Strait Crossing Project from conceptual design in 1987 to the final project design. The 13 km (8 mile) long bridge links Prince Edward Island with New Brunswick and mainland Canada. The current design is based on main bridge spans of 250 m (820 ft) to minimize the number of piers and foundations in the Strait. Each span consists of a continuous precast, prestressed concrete variable depth double cantilever girder Barry Lester, P.Eng. with a length of 190 m (623 ft) and a drop-in segment of 60 m President (197 ft). The design took into consideration unusually heavy SLG Stanley Consultants Inc. vehicle loads, high wind loads, seismic factors, very high Calgary, Alberta icepack forces and possible ship collisions. Precast concrete Canada production began in the summer of 1994 and the main spans will be erected beginning in September 1995. The project is scheduled for completion in the summer of 1997. he Northumberland Strait gotiating the Terms of Confederation, Crossing Project (NSCP) is a the Federal Government of Canada T 13 km (8 mile) long bridge (see promised to promote efficient commu­ Fig. 1), with associated approach nication between the island and the roads and shoreside facilities, joining mainland, a promise that has been ful­ Prince Edward Island to New filled by the payment of annual subsi­ Brunswick and mainland Canada (see dies to support the island ferry service Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • K'nex Intro to Structures: Bridges Teacher Guide
    INTRO TO STRUCTURES BRIDGES Teacher’s Guide KNX 96168-V2 K’NEX Education is a Registered Trademark © 2007 K’NEX Limited Partnership Group of K’NEX Limited Partnership Group. and its licensors. Conforms to the Requirements of ASTM Standard Consumer Safety Specification on Toy Safety, F963-03. Manufactured under U.S. Patents 5,061,219; 5,199,919; 5,350,331; 5,137,486. Other U.S. and foreign patents pending. Protected by International Copyright. All rights reserved. A NOTE ABOUT SAFETY: CAUTIONS: Safety is of primary concern in science and Students should not overstretch or overwind their technology classrooms. It is recommended that Rubber Bands. Overstretching and overwinding you develop a set of rules that governs the safe, can cause the Rubber Band to snap and cause proper use of K’NEX in your classroom. Safety, personal injury. Any wear and tear or deterioration as it relates to the use of the Rubber Bands of Rubber Bands should be reported immediately should be specifically addressed. to the teacher. Teachers and students should inspect Rubber Bands for deterioration before each experiment. Caution students to keep hands and hair away from all moving parts. Never put fingers in moving Gears or other moving parts. CHOKE HAZARD - Small parts. Not for children under 3 years. BRIDGES Introduction: OVERVIEW This Teacher’s Guide has been developed to support you as your students investigate the K’NEX Introduction to Structures: Bridges set. In conjunction with the K’NEX materials and individual student journals that we suggest your students maintain throughout their investigations, the information and resources included here can be used to build your students’ understanding of scientific, technical and design concepts and to channel their inquiries into active and meaningful learning experiences.
    [Show full text]
  • People and Power to Move the World
    Parsons Bridge and Tunnel People and power to move the world. 100 M Street, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20003 U.S.A. Phone: +1 202.775.3300 www.parsons.com Power to Connecting past, change present, the global and future. Parsons is a recognized leader in the design and landscape. construction of complex structures and bridges across the globe. Having completed more than 4,500 bridges and 250 tunnels around the world, we apply creative expertise to solve the most challenging issues our customers face today with a vision for the future. Massive or modest, new or rehabilitated, our purpose in every bridge and tunnel is to carry traffic safely with sound engineering and exceptional style while connecting people and places. Parsons’ Bridge and Tunnel Division provides connections and cost-efficient. By combining form with function, economy, to communities of the past, present, and future. We and sustainability, our award-winning bridges and tunnels understand the importance of our customers’ existing fulfill an important purpose and often serve as historic or infrastructure and the history of their community, as well as world-class landmarks. the principles of sustainability, safety, and quality. Parsons Across the globe, our bridges enrich skylines and our tunnels has proudly provided design, construction management, feature state-of-the-art technology. And by minimizing and inspection services for some of the world’s largest and impacts to the environment and maintaining the culture of most complex bridges. Our reputation for innovative the community, Parsons’ custom infrastructure pays homage design and construction methods, and our commitment to to the past while recognizing the importance of tomorrow.
    [Show full text]
  • Bridge Strength: Truss Vs. Arch Vs. Beam
    CALIFORNIA STATE SCIENCE FAIR 2015 PROJECT SUMMARY Name(s) Project Number Christopher J. Nagelvoort J0322 Project Title Bridge Strength: Truss vs. Arch vs. Beam Abstract Objectives/Goals The objective of this experiment was to determine which bridge design is the strongest against heavy loads through deflection testing on three bridge models. Also the goal was to understand and analyze how much greater the strength would be between the three models and plausibly why their strengths differ. Methods/Materials The project began with the design and then construction of the bridge models that were 0.75 meters long, out of glue and wooden popsicle sticks. Before deflection testing occurred, supplies need were a bucket, bag of sand, string, scale, caliber, construction paper, and a testing stand to stabilize the bridge models before loads were attached. Finally deflection testing initiated by loading each bridge model with 1 # 7 pounds of sand, with 1 pound increments. For each load the deflection was measured and recorded. Results For cumulative deflection, the truss bridge under 7 pounds of load deflected 0.2 cm. The arch bridge under 7 pounds achieved 0.69 cm. While the span/beam bridge deflected by 2.01 cm under the same 7 pound load. The deflection for each 1 pound load increment was also measured and recorded. This deflection is referred as incremental deflection. The average incremental deflection for the truss bridge was 0.0285 cm. For the arch bridge, the average is 0.0985 cm and the span/beam bridge#s average is 0.2871 cm. Conclusions/Discussion With the bridge#s designs researched and tested, it was determined that the truss is the strongest bridge, with arch the second, and span/beam dramatically weaker than the other two.
    [Show full text]