applied
sciences
Article
Stiffening Cello Bridges with Design
Laura Lodetti, Sebastian Gonzalez *, Fabio Antonacci and Augusto Sarti
Citation: Lodetti, L.; Gonzalez, S.;
Antonacci, F.; Sarti, A. Stiffening
Cello Bridges with Design. Appl. Sci.
2023, 13, 928. https://doi.org/
10.3390/app13020928
Academic Editor:Mariana Domnica
Stanciu, Voichiţa Bucur and Mircea
Mihǎlcicǎ
Received: 7 December 2022
Revised: 4 January 2023
Accepted: 5 January 2023
Published: 10 January 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13020928
Musical Acoustics Lab at the Violin Museum of Cremona, DEIB, Politecnico di Milano, Cremona Campus,
26100 Cremona, Italy
* Correspondence: tsuresuregusa@gmail.com
Abstract: In instruments of the violin family, the bridge is the part in charge of transferring the
vibrational energy of the strings into the body and therefore contributes greatly to the sound of the
instrument. The bridge needs to be light enough to efficiently transmit the strings’ movement yet
rigid enough to support the static load of the strings. Historically, there have been several attempts at
solving this problem with different designs, arriving in the early 1800s at the two current models: the
French and the Belgian. Recently, in Cremona, Italy, the Amorim family of luthiers has developed a
new cello bridge design. Inspired by their work, we study the influence of the shape of the legs of
the cello bridge on its static and vibrational behavior through parametric modeling and simulations
using the Finite Element Method. In particular, we perform displacement and modal analysis for
different boundary conditions, providing in addition a detailed description of the mode shapes. We
also compute and compare Frequency Response Functions for the different geometries. Our results
show that shape can indeed be used to control the vibrational and static responses of the cello and
consequently tune its sound.
Keywords: cello bridge; parametric modeling; finite element method; musical acoustics; modal
analysis; frequency response function
1. Introduction
The modern cello bridge’s design has remained pretty much intact since its introduc-
tion in the late 1700s [1]. The upper shape of the bridge is determined by playability—the
musician needs to be able to bow in each of the strings—whereas the lower part needs to
perfectly match the belly of the instrument. The middle part, however, has seen the most
variation in design during its history. One wants a bridge that is light enough to transfer as
much energy as possible to the body of the instrument, yet strong enough to support the
load of the strings without breaking or deforming [2,3].
Bridges commonly used nowadays fall into the “French” or the “Belgian” model,
the former being shorter and wider, while the latter is more slender and has longer legs.
It is known by makers that different designs favor different sounds, yet there is no clear
scientific understanding of this phenomenon. Recently, the Cremonese luthier Luiz Amorim
started designing and using a revised version of the bridge in which the legs, rather than
being curved, are carved straight from the center of the bridge towards the instrument.
Pictures of a traditional bridge and Amorim’s cello bridge are shown in Figure 1.
Only a small portion of the literature in musical acoustics focus specifically on the
cello bridge. The most relevant and complete review of the behavior of bridges is given
by Fletcher and Rossings in [2] and by Rossings in [3]. Most of their discussion considers
violin bridges and is extended to cello bridges only partially. In all instruments of the violin
family, the bridge serves two main purposes. It statically sustains the strings, holding them
in place at the correct height and at the correct distance from the fingerboard, effectively
determining their vibrating length and guaranteeing the possibility for the player to bow
each string individually. Moreover, the bridge also acts as very necessary impedance
adapter between the strings and the body, and transforms the mainly lateral motion of the
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 2 of 19

firsts into mainly vertical forces on the top. This filter can be controlled by the addition of
mass or the stiffening of the bridge [4].

Figure 1. (a) Picture of a French model cello bridge blank (courtesy of luthier Matteo Pontiggia).
(b) Picture of Amorim’s Model X blank during the final construction stages (courtesy of luthier Luiz
Amorim). (c) Three examples of our 3D model and its evolution as we vary the control parameter of
the legs.

Inspired by the design modifications of the Amorim family, we study the relationship
between the shape of the legs in a cello bridge and its mechanical properties: dynamic as
well as static. By parameterizing the shape variation, we can easily study how the design
determines the vibrational response of the bridge. This relationship between shape and
vibrational behavior has been greatly studied in the case of the violin and the guitar [5–7]
but has not yet been applied to the cello. In this article, we aim to set that record straight.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Modeling of the Bridge
In the study, we considered a parametric interpolation between two different models:
on the one hand is a traditional French model, and on the other hand, the bridge design
proposed by the Amorim family, referred to as “Model X” (Figure 1b). The 3D geometry of
the bridges has been modeled through the CAD software Fusion 360.
The terminology used in the description of the bridge can be found in Figure A1. To
build the Normal Model, we drew the outline of a generic French bridge blank, using Bézier
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 3 of 19

curves for the outlines of the legs and splines for all the remaining boundaries, similarly to
what was carried out in [8]. The main advantage of using Bézier curves for the legs was
the possibility to manipulate them through the control points with more ease. The side
of the bridge that on a cello would face the tailpiece was left flat, while the front side of
the bridge was instead tapered linearly from the feet to the waist; above the waist, it was
modeled with a slanted cylindrical surface. On a cello, this side would face the fingerboard.
The cylindrical taper was added to reproduce the constant thickness found in real bridges
at the contact area with the strings.
The Bézier curve used for the external outline of the legs on one side of the bridge
was defined with three control points, obtaining a quadratic polynomial. We set the
position of the control point P of the Bézier curve (Figure 1c) as the geometrical parameter.
For ease of parameterization, we removed the greaves and made the bridge symmetrical
with respect to the y-axis. The absence of the greaves proved to have negligible effects,
which was considered the aim of the study, and allowed a smooth transition between the
different shapes.
The geometry of the models was obtained by a linear modification of the position (in
mm) of the control point P accordingly to the following relations:
(
p x = p x,0 + 0.5i
py = py,0
where, again, i is the number of the model and p x,0 , py,0 are the coordinates of the control
point in the Normal Model. Note that the initial coordinate p x,0 < 0 as we arbitrarily set
the point P in the second quadrant of the xy-plane. The Beziér curve defining the internal
outline of the legs was a third-degree polynomial, with control points’ positions either fixed
or constrained to P to maintain a constant width in the legs.
The feet and the upper section of the bridge (above the waist) were kept unchanged,
in contrast to Amorim’s model, whose feet are slightly larger and whose wings are less
ornate. Neither the feet nor the upper arch curvature were fitted to a reference cello.

2.2. Material Properties

The standard wood for bridges is Bosnian maple. We modeled it as a homogeneous
and orthotropic material defined by its density and nine other mechanical parameters.
We set a reference system of axes x, y, z corresponding to the direction along grain of the
wood, the radial direction, and the tangential direction. The values considered for each
mechanical parameter are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Mechanical parameter values of the simulated material, taken from [9]. Density ρ is assumed
to be equal to 700 kg/m3 .

Young’s Modulus Rigidity Modulus Poisson’s Ratio

Ex = 10.00 GPa Gxy = 1.60 GPa νxy = 0.38
Ey = 2.00 GPa Gyz = 0.72 GPa νyz = 0.47
Ez = 1.20 GPa Gzx = 1.60 GPa νzx = 0.48

The mechanical behavior of the bridges was simulated with COMSOL Multiphysics
using Finite Element Method, performing stationary studies and eigenfrequency studies in
solid mechanics physics. Each geometry was imported and analyzed with a tetrahedron
mesh automatically generated by the software. This is the same method used and validated
in previous studies [6,7,10–12]. A review of studies using FEM for musical instruments can
be found in [13].
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 4 of 19

2.3. Boundary Conditions

We have studied four different boundary conditions to have an idea of the dynamic
effect that the stiffening of the legs has on the vibrational response. The first case is the free
boundary conditions, which correspond to the bridge blank not interacting with any other
part of the cello. Then we modeled the interaction between the bridge, the body, and the
strings in different ways, inspired by [14]. We defined u, v, w as the displacement in the
directions of the x, y, z axes, respectively. First, we imposed a fixed boundary condition
at the base of the feet (u = v = w = 0), but we set no constraint on the point of contact
with the strings. In a more realistic approach, instead of fixed boundary conditions, we
implemented springs in three dimensions so as to represent the movement of the top plate,
as depicted in Figure 2. Note that this is a coarse approximation, as we know that a cello has
many more degrees of freedom. The spring constants in this case are k1x = 1.8 × 106 N/m,
k1y = 0.1 × 106 N/m, and k1z = 7.7 × 106 N/m. We also set a scalar damping loss factor
ηs = 0.1, such that the total force exerted by the springs with loss is f sl = (1 + iη ) f s ,
where f s is the elastic spring force. Finally, we implemented the boundary condition at the
point of contact with the strings. Here, the bridge plate cannot move in the z direction, so
we imposed w = 0 on the upper arch. Furthermore, a spring along the x direction was
used to represent the force that the strings apply on the bridge. For the sake of simplicity,
we modeled all the strings as exerting the same force, so that a single spring constant
k2x = 0.1 × 106 N/m was needed. The values used have been taken from [14].

Figure 2. (a) Picture of a cellist playing the D string sul tasto, meaning that the bow is near the
fingerboard. Ideally, when bowing the instrument, the player applies a force F perpendicular to the
string. (b) Schematic representation of spring locations used as boundary conditions. In addition,
the figure shows the location of point Q and the force vector F, used for the FRF. The figure shows the
Normal Model but is valid for all models.

2.4. Forcing Term and Measure Point

To obtain the Frequency Response Function of the different models, and therefore a
more complete picture of their behavior in frequency, we simulated a harmonic excitation
force F of amplitude 1 N. F was applied to a small section of the upper arch of the bridge,
modeling the notch that would accommodate the D string; it was tangential to the surface,
with no component in the z direction (Figure 2). In this case, the feet were set as fixed. We
also defined a point Q on the surface of the bridge and computed its displacement.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 5 of 19

3. Results
We focused on the parametric dependence of the bridge response in two cases: the
displacement under load and the vibrational response. Our idea was to understand how
the modification of the legs curve affects the behavior of the bridge and if this change could
help explain the subjective perception of the Amorim family, who observes that their model
has a faster response.

3.1. Static Behavior

Figure 3 shows the displacement of the bridge when the force of the strings is modeled
through a nominal compression force, applied at the string notches in the y direction.
The bridge displacement is a three-dimensional field, but most of it is observed on the xy
plane. Figure 3a shows the displacement field |u| for the two extreme cases (Normal and
Model 30) while Figure 3b shows the value of v in each point of the bridge. The two models
present clear differences, especially in the distribution of |u| in the area of the legs.
In Figure 3c, the spatial average of |u| is plotted as a function of the model number.
The displacement decays linearly with the model number. If we recall that in a spring the
displacement is inversely proportional to the stiffness, we can conclude that the straighten-
ing of the legs corresponds to a stiffening of the bridge. In particular, the stiffness along the
x direction increases by more than 50%. The v component shows a similar behavior but in
a smaller range, as shown in Figure 3d. The displacement reaches a plateau around model
20, and the overall decrease is around 17% instead.

Figure 3. Displacement fields on the bridge under load. (a) Magnitude of the displacement along
the x direction. (b) Displacement along the y direction. (c) Spatial average of the displacement along
the x direction normalized for the Normal Model, as a function of the model number. The equation
of the linear fitting curve is f (m) = −0.0119m + 1. (d) Spatial average of the displacement along
the y direction normalized for the Normal Model, as a function of the model number. The equation
of the piecewise linear fitting curve is f (m) = −0.0062m + 0.9946 for m ≤ 20, f (m) = 0.8699 for
m > 20. The R-squared refers to the first portion of the fit, as the constant value in the second portion
is the mean.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 6 of 19

3.2. Eigenfrequency Study

Figure 4 shows the relative variation in the first ten eigenfrequencies for the (a) free
and (b) fixed feet boundary conditions. In particular, the variation in the eigenfrequencies
is normalized with respect to the Normal Model.

Figure 4. (a) Changes in natural frequencies f n in free boundary conditions. (b) Variation in natural
frequencies f n in fixed boundary condition. Frequencies from different models are shown as a
function of the mode number n; f 0n is the frequency of the nth mode for the Normal Model. (c) Mode
shapes and corresponding natural frequencies for n = 3, . . . , 6 in constrained boundary conditions,
|d| being the norm of displacement, shown on the Normal Model.

In free boundary conditions, the modal frequencies that change the most when varying
the shape of the legs are associated with modes 1, 4, 6, 7, 8. The mode shapes associated
with these modes present a displacement concentrated in the legs (Figures A2 and A3).
In particular, the mode shapes of modes 6 and 7 exhibit the most different mode shapes if
we compare the Normal Model to Model 30.
In fixed boundary conditions, modes 3, 4, 5, and 6 are the most affected in terms of
frequency by the change in the shape of the legs. The mode shapes associated with modes 3,
5, and 6 that occur in plane xy are also reported in other studies [9,15] as the most relevant.
A summary of the eigenfrequencies of the first 10 modes under different boundary
conditions is given in Tables 2 and 3. Figure 5 allows one to visualize the same eigen-
frequencies and to compare them for each boundary condition. It is apparent that the
boundary conditions have the largest impact on the natural frequencies. If the feet are
fixed, the first frequency decreases by almost 1000 Hz with respect to the free boundary
conditions. Something similar happens when using springs for the boundary conditions
and there are many more modes in the mid-frequency range (1–4 kHz) than in the free
boundary case. This dependence on the boundary conditions shows that it is not possible to
directly obtain insights into how the bridge behaves in the cello from its free body behavior.
Accurately describing the boundary conditions of a real instrument goes far beyond the
scope of this article and should be tackled in future research.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 7 of 19

Figure 5. Modal frequencies as a function of the mode number, from Tables 2 and 3. Note that in this
case, eigenfrequencies are rearranged in order to take care of mode switches. Each plot compares
the values obtained for the Normal model and Model 30 in a specific boundary condition. (a) Free
boundary conditions. (b) Fixed boundary conditions. (c) Boundary condition with springs at the feet
only. (d) Boundary condition with both springs at the feet and at the upper arch.

Table 2. Values of the first 10 natural frequencies (in Hz) of the Normal Model in different boundary
conditions. Case (c) only includes springs at the feet, while case (d) both springs at the feet and at
the upper arch. Modes where the bridge moves rigidly are denoted with rm . All mode shapes are
available in Figures A2, A4, A6, and A8.

Mode Number (a) Free (b) Fixed (c) Spring (d) Spring+
1 1227 333 160 498rm
2 1311 1580 309rm 861
3 1331 2316 968 1597
4 2337 2918 1090 2231
5 3306 3224 1507 2364
6 3753 3734 2149 3076
7 4298 4003 2535 3083
8 4768 5369 3087 3250
9 5347 6504 3246 4082
10 5889 7252 3592 4887

Table 3. Values of the first 10 natural frequencies (in Hz) of Model 30 in different boundary conditions.
Modes where the bridge moves rigidly are denoted with rm . Mode switches with respect to the
Normal Model in the same boundary conditions are in bold. All mode shapes are available in
Figures A3, A5, A7, and A9.

Mode Number (a) Free (b) Fixed (c) Spring (d) Spring+
1 1099 327 162 317 rm
2 1283 1583 317 rm 870
3 1320 1815 1106 1331
4 2126 3447 1085 1747
5 3212 3677 1330 2459
6 4437 4186 1744 3145
7 4827 3994 2536 3617
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 8 of 19

Table 3. Cont.

Mode Number (a) Free (b) Fixed (c) Spring (d) Spring+
8 5590 5356 3856 3859
9 5791 6704 3516 4127
10 6140 7251 3614 4643

3.3. Frequency Response Function

Figure 6 shows the amplitude of the FRF of the bridge, obtained from the displacement
d of the point Q when the force ~F is applied. Consistently with the previous results, the FRF
peaks correspond to the values of eigenfrequencies of Tables 2 and 3. The first two modes are
not particularly affected by the leg modification, while in the frequency range 1500–3500 Hz,
aside from the differences in the locations of the peaks, a decrease in magnitude is clearly
noticeable from the Normal Model to Model 30. From the eigenfrequency analysis, we
know there is a continuous (albeit non-linear) shifting of the third mode as the parametric
model changes. The eigenfrequency does not practically change for the first 10 models
and has a rapid variation in the last five. The vibrational response for the intermediate
models is consistent with this change in eigenfrequency, and the amplitude follows suit.
This particular variation in a single mode is quite relevant as it would allow the instrument
maker to tune the response of the instrument in the middle range without having to modify
the structure of the instrument, only the set-up.

Figure 6. Frequency Response Function of the Normal Model and of Model 30. The FRF is computed
between the nominal excitation force F and the displacement d of point Q, located at the hip of the
bridge. The frequency resolution is 5 Hz.

4. Conclusions
In this article, we have shown by means of finite element modeling that changing
the design of the cello bridge is akin to stiffening its material. The variation in apparent
stiffness has a linear dependence with the parameter controlling the shape variation of the
legs. The range of values of the stiffness reachable with this varying geometry corresponds
to a 50% increase in the longitudinal stiffness and a 17% increase in the radial stiffness.
Furthermore, when looking at the admittance of the bridge, we have found that the response
in the mid-range can be continuously controlled by changing the geometric parameter.
This would allow the instrument maker to fine tune the response of an instrument in a
particular frequency range without having to make structural changes to the instrument,
only to the setup.
An aspect that we have not studied in this article is the influence on the sound and
playability due to design variations. We know that changing the shape of the bridge will
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 9 of 19

shift the position of the modes in the so-called “bridge hill” region [16], so we expect a
change in the mid-range components of the sound. According to the musicians who have
tried this model, the cello has a faster response and it is “easier” to play. This points towards
a change in the minimum bow force due to the change in bridge resonances [17]. These
are exciting subjects of research we are currently pursuing experimentally. To facilitate
studies like this by other groups, our code and models are freely available online (See Data
Availability Statement).
The implications of this research in instrument-making could be far reaching: we
have found a simple way to compensate for variations in the material by a continuous
geometrical parameter. The material parameters of a given blank can be easily estimated
by tapping experiments, and thanks to the results presented here, the shape required for
the desired stiffness can be easily computed. This is another step in our efforts of bringing
cutting edge technology to a 300-year-old craft.
This paper has shown how the intuition and embodied knowledge of luthiers can help
guide scientific research and how science can give an objective correlate to the subjective
intuitions of the experts in the field. Rather than disregarding the know-how of instrument
makers, this article aims to show that both kinds of knowledge can work together and
complement each other to achieve new insights.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, project administration, and supervision, S.G.; investiga-

tion, software, data curation, and visualization, L.L.; methodology and formal analysis, S.G. and L.L.;
writing—original draft, S.G and L.L.; writing—review and editing, L.L and S.G.; funding acquisition,
F.A. and A.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the MSCA EF 2020 grant of Politecnico di Milano.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data relevant to the study (for example, CAD and COMSOL
Multiphysics files) are available at https://github.com/LauraLodetti/Cello_bridges (Accessed:
4 January 2023). Moreover, a short video containing animations can be viewed on YouTube
https://youtu.be/JTxqf4hO2vA (Accessed: 4 January 2023).
Acknowledgments: We thank the Amorim family for their openness and willingness to engage in
this research and C. Espinoza for the critical reading of the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A
Appendix A.1. Terminology

Figure A1. Outline of a French cello bridge and the names of the different parts.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 10 of 19

Appendix A.2. Mode Shapes

The figures in this section contain all the mode shapes for the Normal Model and
Model 30 in all the different boundary conditions considered. We also describe the
modes in the case of free boundary conditions and point out mode switches and/or
relevant observations.
The images are meant to be used as a reminder of what the mode shape looks like
and to help the comparison between different models and boundary conditions in a quick
way; however, they might prove hard to follow. A video that shows animations for all of
them is available online on https://youtu.be/JTxqf4hO2vA (Accessed: 4 January 2023) or
at https://github.com/LauraLodetti/Cello_bridges (Accessed: 4 January 2023).
Figure A2 shows mode shapes in free boundary conditions, for the Normal model.
Mode 1: The feet move inward and outward in the xy-plane, symmetrically with respect to
the y-axis.
Mode 2: Two horizontal nodal lines are noticeable at the shins and at the heart of the
bridge, respectively. The upper arch of the bridge has greater displacement with respect to
the waist and the feet.
Mode 3: A central vertical nodal line is combined with two nodal lines at the shins.
A sort of “walking” mode, where the left side (mostly the kidney wing, the knee, the foot)
and the right side move in opposite phase in the z direction.
Mode 4: Three nodal points are present (one over the heart, two on the shins). The feet
oscillate around the nodal points on the xy-plane, in phase with each other. The portion of
the bridge around the waist rotates in counter phase around the nodal point over the heart.
Mode 5: Similar to Mode 2, but with three horizontal nodal lines (above the heart,
at the waist, at the shins).
Mode 6: One nodal point at the waist and two nodal points at the outer conjunction
between the shins and the feet. The inner toes move up and down, with opposite phase.
The upper arch rotates around the nodal point.
Mode 7: Two symmetrical nodal lines start from the upper arch, pass beside the heart
and the hip, and continue down the legs. The motion is out of the xy-plane, with kidney
wings in phase with each other and in opposite phase with the crotch and the inner toes.
Mode 8: Internal toes displace symmetrically around a nodal point on the outer shin
and are accompanied by an up-and-down motion (with opposite phase) of the whole region
above the waist.
Mode 9: Four horizontal node lines (one above the heart, one just below the heart and
above the kidney wings, one just below the waist and one at the connection of shins and
feet). The displacement of the kidney wing is noticeably greater than the one of the legs.
Mode 10: Movement in the z direction of the kidney wings, accompanied by smaller z
movement of the legs. Opposite leg and kidney wing are in phase, in a sort of “walking in
place” mode.
Figure A3 shows the mode shapes for Model 30, again in free boundary conditions.
Mode shapes for modes 1, 2, 3, and 10 are very similar to the Normal Model. Modes 4, 5
and 6 present small differences: in mode 4, the nodal points move slightly upwards in y
direction; in mode 5, the nodal lines appear more curved, as if going towards an x shape;
and in mode 6, the movement of the legs and of the feet is more enhanced. There is a mode
switch between mode 8 and 9, where in mode 8, the nodal lines go towards an x shape, and
in mode 9, the nodal points in the feet move towards the center.
Figure A4 shows the mode shapes of the Normal Model, in case of fixed boundary
conditions. As expected, mode shapes differ from the ones in free boundary conditions.
Mode 1: Back-and-forth, out-of-plane motion of the upper portion of the bridge.
Mode 2: One horizontal nodal line.
Mode 3: Sideways rotation of the portion above the heart.
Mode 4: Motion similar to mode 3 in free boundary conditions, with a vertical nodal
line at the center and alternated back-and-forth motion of the kidney wings.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 11 of 19

Mode 5: Rocking motion of the waist of the bridge, with a nodal point slightly above
the heart.
Mode 6: Up and down motion of the upper portion of the bridge.
Mode 7: Out-of-plane mode shape with two horizontal nodal lines.
Mode 8: Ring mode, with kidney wings and upper arch moving out of phase with
respect to the heart.
Mode 9: Back-and-forth alternate motion of the kidney wings, with a vertical nodal line.
Mode 10: In-plane inwards and outwards motion of the kidney wings, symmetrical
with respect to the y-axis.
Figure A5 shows the mode shapes of Model 30, in case of fixed boundary conditions.
Mode shapes remain very similar to the Normal Model, except for a mode switch between
mode 6 and mode 7.
Figures A6 and A7 show the mode shapes of the Normal Model and Model 30 respec-
tively, in case of Spring feet boundary conditions (defined as case (c)). Mode shapes in this
case present similarities to the previous ones, but interestingly, a rigid motion (translation
in x direction) appears in mode 2.
Figures A8 and A9 show the mode shapes of the Normal Model and Model 30 respec-
tively, in case of Spring boundary conditions both on the feet and the upper arch of the
bridge (defined as case (d)). A rigid motion, similar to the one of the second mode of the
previous case, appears here on the first mode.

Figure A2. Mode shapes in free boundary conditions (case (a)) for the Normal Model.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 12 of 19

Figure A3. Mode shapes in free boundary conditions (case (a)) for Model 30.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 13 of 19

Figure A4. Mode shapes in fixed boundary conditions (case (b)) for the Normal Model.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 14 of 19

Figure A5. Mode shapes in fixed boundary conditions (case (b)) for Model 30.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 15 of 19

Figure A6. Mode shapes in spring boundary conditions (case (c)) for the Normal Model.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 16 of 19

Figure A7. Mode shapes in spring boundary conditions (case (c)) for Model 30.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 17 of 19

Figure A8. Mode shapes in spring boundary conditions (case (d)) for the Normal Model.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 18 of 19

Figure A9. Mode shapes in spring boundary conditions (case (d)) for Model 30.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 928 19 of 19

References
1. Raymaekers, W. Bridge shapes of the violin and other bowed instruments, 1400–1900: the origin and evolution of their design.
Early Music 2020, 48, 225–250. [CrossRef]
2. Fletcher, N.H.; Rossing, T.D. The physics of Musical Instruments; Springer Science & Business Media New York, 2012.
3. Rossing, T.D.; et al. The Science of String Instruments; Springer: New York 2010.
4. Müller, H. The function of the violin bridge. Catgut Acoust. Soc. Newsl. 1979, 31, 19–22.
5. Gough, C. Violin plate modes. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2015, 137, 139–153. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Gonzalez, S.; Salvi, D.; Baeza, D.; Antonacci, F.; Sarti, A. A Data-driven Approach to Violin Making. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 9455.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Salvi, D.; Gonzalez, S.; Antonacci, F.; Sarti, A. Parametric optimization of violin top plates using machine learning. In Proceedings
of the 27th International Congress on Sound and Vibration, ICSV 2021, Virtual, 11–16 July 2021.
8. Marschke, S.; Wunderlich, L.; Ring, W.; Achterhold, K. An approach to construct a three-dimensional isogeometric model from
µ-CT scan data with an application to the bridge of a violin. Comput. Aided Geom. Des. 2020, 78, 1–19. [CrossRef]
9. Rodgers, O.; Masino, T. The effect of wood removal on bridge frequencies. Catgut Acoust Soc. J. 1990, 1, 6–10.
10. Gonzalez, S.; Salvi, D.; Antonacci, F.; Sarti, A. Eigenfrequency Optimisation of Free Violin Plates. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2021,
149, 1400–1410. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
11. Lercari, M.; Gonzalez, S.; Espinoza, C.; Longo, G.; Antonacci, F.; Sarti, A. Using Metamaterials in Guitar Top Plates: A Numerical
Study. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 7313. [CrossRef]
12. Gonzalez, S.; Chacra, E.; Carreño, C.; Espinoza, C. Wooden Mechanical Metamaterials: Towards tunable wood plates. Mater. Des.
2022, 221, 110952. [CrossRef]
13. Kaselouris, E.; Bakarezos, M.; Tatarakis, M.; Papadogiannis, N.A.; Dimitriou, V. A Review of Finite Element Studies in String
Musical Instruments. Acoustics 2022, 4, 183–202. [CrossRef]
14. Kabała, A.; Niewczyk, B.K.; Gapiński, B. Violin bridge vibrations—FEM. Vib. Phys. Syst. 2018, 29, 1–7.
15. Gi-Sang, C. Analysis of Vibration in Cello Bridge. J. Acoust. Soc. Korea 2006, 25, 197–206.
16. Woodhouse, J. On the “bridge hill” of the violin. Acta Acust. United Acust. 2005, 91, 155–165.
17. Mansour, H.; Woodhouse, J.; Scavone, G.P. On minimum bow force for bowed strings. Acta Acust. United Acust. 2017, 103, 317–330.
[CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.