An Energy Method for Arch Bridge Analysis.

Bridle, R J; Hughes, T. G.

doi:10.1680/iicep.1990.9397

Cited by 20 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bridle & Hughes [18] present a method for masonry arch analysis, specifically adapted to bridge structures, invoking Castigliano's theorem to solve for redundant quantities. Since they propose to account for the loss of cross-section when cracking develops (presumably for any tension within the arch ring), the arch ring has to be divided into elements and solved iteratively under increments of loading.…”

Section: Classical Analysis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hughes & Pritchard [39] conducted in situ measurements of dead and live load stresses in an arch bridge. They compared these measurements with the predictions made by the tapered beam element model described by Bridle & Hughes [18]. They found that the dead load stresses were suggestive of the development of abutment spreading subsequent to the initial construction of the bridge and the development of hinges at the abutments.…”

Section: Empirical and Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Choo, Coutie & Gong [29] account for the loss of stiffness in cracked or crushed masonry by adopting a no-tension, trapezoidal stress-strain law for the masonry. Using beam elements with stiffness parameters at each end, adjusted for the state of nodal axial force and bending moment, they construct an iterative, incremental finite element routine, similar to the stiffness method routines [18,19] described earlier in this paper. They introduce the further refinement of considering the distribution of axle loads through the fill, and arrive at a satisfactory replication of the bridge tests at Bridgemill, Bargower and Preston.…”

Section: Finite Element Implementationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Analysis of masonry arches and vaults

Boothby

2001

Progress Structural Eng Maths

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing interest in the preservation of historic structures has created a need for methods for the analysis of load-bearing unreinforced masonry structures, such as arches, vaults, and buttresses. Although the plasticity methods, first applied to medieval structures in detail by Heyman, provide a useful and intuitive approach to the understanding of the behaviour of masonry arches and vaults, their usefulness in performing actual assessments of such structures has limitations. The constitutive laws of the materials used in masonry structures are not always amenable to accurate treatment by the rigid`plastic simplification, and the complexity of many vaulted masonry structures makes the application of these methods difficult. Moreover, empirical studies have shown that these structures may be subject to three-dimensional effects that are not entirely addressed by the application of plastic or elastic analysis in two dimensions. Progress has been made recently in the development of constitutive laws for ancient masonry structures and in the application of these to the analysis of unreinforced masonry structural systems. Various formulations of three-dimensional finite element analysis, including discrete element methods, and plasticity methods have also proven useful.

show abstract

Section: Classical Analysis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Empirical and Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Finite Element Implementationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analysis of masonry arches and vaults

Boothby

2001

Progress Structural Eng Maths

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since classical techniques, such as the Mery and the MEXE methods, provide only partial information and are not fully satisfactory for modern standards ͑Hughes and Blackler 1997͒, several procedures have been developed to this extent, both simplified in the geometry and in the constitutive models ͑Heyman 1982; Crisfield 1985;Bridle and Hughes 1990;Molins and Roca 1998;Brencich and De Francesco 2004a,b;Cavicchi andGambarotta 2005͒, anddetailed three-dimensional finite-element models ͑Sicilia et al 2000;Fanning et al 2005; among others͒. The main drawback of the detailed models is the large number of parameters to be defined; the reliability of the final results are strictly connected to their identification.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tanaro Bridge: Dynamic Tests on a Couple of Spans

Brencich

Sabia

2007

J. Bridge Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Tanaro Bridge, an 18-span 225-m long bridge on the Tanaro River in northwestern Italy, presented the following elements of interest: ͑1͒ the barrel divided into adjacent arches; and ͑2͒ transverse tie bars and internal spandrels connecting the three parts of the barrels. Its demolition, in 2003, gave the opportunity of performing dynamic tests on a couple of spans at two stages of demolition: ͑1͒ fill removed; and ͑2͒ fill and internal spandrels removed. Without the uncertain contribution of the fill, some features of the mechanical response of masonry bridges are discussed and the efficiency of tie bars and internal spandrels is addressed. The data provided can be useful for safety assessment procedures.

show abstract

“…More accurate iterative schemes and more detailed 1-D [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23], 2-D [24-28 among the latest results] and 3-D models [29][30][31][32][33] are the tools of the modern incremental analysis in which the local collapse condition for masonry is usually derived from experimental tests or set according to well-established theories. 1-D models proved to be efficient in assessment and design procedures for single and multi-span bridges, while 2-D and 3-D models may give detailed information on local phenomena at expenses of high computational costs and of other assumptions discussed in detail in the next parts of this paper.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Masonry Bridges: Numerical and Theoretical Approaches

Brencich¹

Computational Science, Engineering &Amp; Technology Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mechanical response of masonry bridges is still only partially known. Recent tests on reduced scale models and on real scale bridges showed that masonry bridges are complex structures in which all the elements take part in the load carrying system. The assessment procedures rely on some commonly accepted assumptions and make largely use of Limit Analysis, which assumptions are not fulfilled by brickwork. Recent tests showed that only deep arches can be reasonable dealt with Limit Analysis procedures while the collapse of shallow arches is not a bending collapse, that is typical of collapse mechanisms, but it is ruled by the axial force, collapse being attained because of compressive crushing of some sections.In this paper a comprehensive view of the assessment procedures is given underlying pros and cons of every approach. An example provides an application of the discussed issues.

show abstract

An Energy Method for Arch Bridge Analysis.

Cited by 20 publications

References 0 publications

Analysis of masonry arches and vaults

Analysis of masonry arches and vaults

Tanaro Bridge: Dynamic Tests on a Couple of Spans

Assessment of Masonry Bridges: Numerical and Theoretical Approaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About