Moveable pedestrian bridge over the Göta Älv (Göteborg, Sweden)
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•715 views
Design of a cable stayed bridge between Stigberget and Slottsberget. The new bridge allows bicycle and pedestrian flow across the river and vessels flow along the river. The cross section of all the main elements, the connections and the open mechanism are defined.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Moveable pedestrian bridge over the Göta Älv (Göteborg, Sweden)
Similar to Moveable pedestrian bridge over the Göta Älv (Göteborg, Sweden) (20)
More from Raul Espasandin
More from Raul Espasandin (18)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Moveable pedestrian bridge over the Göta Älv (Göteborg, Sweden)
- 1. Refinement phase the Mountain Path Miguel Raúl Håkan Carl Isak Castro Espasandín Haglund Hoff Näslund
- 2. Location: Constraints and Possibilities Stigberget Boat traffic - Stena Line - Älvsnabben - Industrial - Personal Can connect different heights Clayey soil in the bottom of the river Slottsberget Lindholmen
- 3. Evaluation criteria Enjoyable to walk across Beautiful design Comfortable to walk/stand on Spectacular opening mechanism Easy accessible for everyone Low effort to maintain High structural and material efficiency Low disruption of traffic in building phase Connect to multiple infrastructures Short opening time Height of the main span Easy to build Low cost to open the bridge Low cost of non-structural maintenance Separation of traffic in structure Sustainable materials Bridge should be/have: MoreimportantLessimportant
- 4. Very high Risk High Moderate Failure of auxiliary services Low Project changes Fail of opening mechanism Very low Fire Fail of non- structural parts Sabotage Fail of the structure Consequence Minor Small Moderate Severe Catastrophic Risk analysis Very high Risk High Project changes Moderate Failure of auxiliary services Low Fail of opening mechanism Very low Fail of non- structural parts Fire Ship collision Sabotage Fail of the structure Consequence Minor Small Moderate Severe Catastrophic Doppler Effect Low Trefoils Moderate Cobras Moderate - High the Trefoils Very high Risk Project changes High Moderate Failure of auxiliary services Fail of opening mechanism Low Very low Fail of non- structural parts Sabotage Fire Fail of the structure Consequence Minor Small Moderate Severe Catastrophic the Cobras the Doppler Effect Risk analysis
- 5. Cobras Trefoils Doppler Effect Risk Moderate - High Moderate Low Enjoyable to walk across Average Good Good Beautiful design Average Good Good Comfortable to walk/stand on Good Average Good Spectacular opening mechanism Very Good Good Average Other design criteria Bad Average Good - WINNER? WINNER? Conclusions
- 6. Design intention “To create a spectacular event that connects the city and widens the city center”
- 7. The chosen design the Trefoils
- 8. Design proposal To Lindholmen To Majorna To city centre To Eriksberg 1193 16 Viewing platform Viewing platform
- 9. Design proposal 120m span 7 m high supports 1 m high support 4 m wide bridge deck 10 m, height above water 11 m high support 17 m high landing
- 11. Structural behaviour Loads: 5kN/m2 (crowd load) * 1,5 Self-Weight * 1,35 Closed position Axial Stress: Max Axial Force: 8200kN on the column and foundations 1200kN on the most critical cable
- 12. Structural behaviour Open position Loads: 5kN/m2 (crowd load) * 1,5 Self-Weight * 1,35 Max Axial Force: 9100kN on the column and foundations 1300kN on the most critical cable Loads: 5kN/m2 (crowd load) on one arm Self-Weight on all the arms Max Bending Moment: 48 400kN on the base of the tower Axial Stress: Moment:
- 13. Buckling of the bridge deck Dynamic behaviour due to pedestrians Structural behaviour
- 14. 1,50 m 0,10 m 0,30 m 0,10 m 4,00 m 0,50 m 3,0 cm 2,0 cm Bridge deck Box beam in steel S450 Structural solution Carbon fibre cables ϕ 66 mm Towers in steel S450: 30 metres high Section - base Section - top Deflection is dimensioning - Open position worst case - Allows for structural redundancy
- 16. Shear connection Openable shear connection Designed to hide the connection Transmits shear between the two bridge decks Slender deck important for visual impression Design intention: Structural solution
- 17. Structural solution Rotation ring Trunnion carrying vertical load from pylon Opening mechanism Gears that drive the opening Ball bearings – allows rotation and transfer force from moment to column Reinforced concrete support
- 18. 9100 kN ~10 000 kN ~ 10 000 kN Foundations of the main towers Reactions Strut and tie for bending Structural solution
- 19. Way of production • Build the foundations and towers • Build the arms section by section in the open position • Possible to build from only one place if the bridge can rotate during construction
- 20. Functional qualities Owner’s perspective:User’s perspective: • Connects different places and different heights • Transports people both across and along the river • An eventful experience when opening • Unique concept which can attract tourists and city residents • Quick opening • A new connection to enhance public transportation
- 21. Development of solution Critical issue: Deflections in open position - Worst case is imposed loads on only one arm Max 400 people Increase stiffness in cables? or Monitor number of people on bridge?
- 22. Development of solution Risk mitigation • Structural redundancy • Fire proof coating around carbon fibre cables • ”Dolphin defence” against ship collision Dolphins against ship collision Lanterns for night time alert Waiting area for ships going upstream Waiting area for ships going downstream Structural redundancy in cables – Effect from deflection governed design
- 23. How many times will the bridge have to open? During rush hour the bridge needs to open every 20 minutes • Scheduled openings • Signs to announce next opening BRIDGE WILL OPEN IN 13:1413:1313:1213:1113:1013:0913:0813:0713:0613:0513:0413:0313:0213:0113:0012:5912:5812:5712:5612:5612:55 Development of solution
- 24. Critical review Disadvantages:Advantages: • Connects four places instead of two • An attraction for the city • Structurally efficient • Needs to open more frequently • Expensive • May be a regulations challenge to allow people on the bridge while moving
- 25. Further investigations Dynamic loads Emergency exits: • Fire • Fail of opening mechanism • No electricity Platforms near the foundations in case of emergency Pedestrian traffic may cause large vibrations Constant cross section makes it vulnerable to wind induced oscillation Turbulence Critical review
- 26. Thank you for your attention!
Editor's Notes
- In our design process we have used the design intention as our original idea, the general intention of what is important to us when designing this bridge. In a general design task it is usually quite easy to get lost along the way and forget ones original idea. We have therefore chosen to go back to our original design intention which shows what we originally intended for this bridge.
- Design Intention Spectacular event; Connects the city; Widens the city centre. Other characteristics: Leisure/resting platforms; Doesn’t disrupt river traffic;
- 45 seconds to open and 45 seconds to close
- fk= 1 863 MPa, E=122 GPa
- The forces are calculated for a moment of 55 000 kNm, which with a distance of 5.5 m between the corresponding reaction forces gives a resulting force of about 10 000 kN. In order to do this calculation more correctly, a lot of more information is needed. Crucial information is capacity and detailed structural behavior of the ball bearings and trunnion, and a knowledge of the area required inside the structure for inspection of the machinery.