7

Verifying the three safety checks, it is

possible to notice that none of them meet the
desirable safety requirements:

st
Figure 5.1 – 1 mode of the arch buckling

[6]
A group of Belgian engineers To surpass this problem, the answer
proposed a simple method to obtain that load. goes through modifying the arch cross-section,
Using a 3D structural model as close as by increasing its diameter to the minimum of
possible to the real bridge, we’ll apply a live 3000 mm. Then the same calculation made so
2
loading to the deck slab (defined as 5kN/m , far, has to be redone, ensuring the safety of
[7]
corresponding to LM4 ), running a buckling the arch.
analysis to achieve a factor λ, that will
reproduce the number of times which the
loading pattern needs to increase to cause the
6. QUANTITIES AND
st
1 mode of instability (Figure 5.1).
That loading pattern is defined by the ESTIMATED BUDGET
Designer, and can correspond to the whole
deck slab area loaded, or just half of it (Figure The main quantities were evaluated. The
[8]
5.2) . amount of concrete and steel (bars, sections
and pre-stressing), was directly obtained from
3
the total volume of the deck slab in m
(concrete), and steel plates and tubes
3
considering (γs = 78kN/m ). The results are
presented in Table 6.1, Figure 6.1 and Table
6.2.
The estimated budget was based on two
actual budgets: one from the case study, the
other from a general Bowstring tied-arch
Figure 5.2 – Overloading patterns bridge. On them it’s possible to retrieve
information about the unitary cost for the
Table 5.2 – λ factors and respective critic loads
Position 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
concrete C35/45 and for the different kind and
λ 4,594 4,969 5,164 5,194 4,86 5,118 4,966 range of steels.
NEd [kN] -65852 -61021 -56804 -57325 -60722 -57148 -60135
NFE,el [kN] 302526 303215 293333 297745 295111 292482 298632 Table 6.1 – Volume of concrete
Volume Weight
Gross area [mm2]
Note that the smallest factor doesn’t [m3/m] [m3] [kN/m3] [kN] [ton]
7830000 7,83 916 25 22892 2336
exactly correspond to the smallest critic load
as shown in Table 5.2.