icdas

S o f t w a r e f o r a u t o m a t i c c r e a t i o n o f m o d e l s u s i n g p a r a m e t r i c d a t a

		Arch Bridges Software Case study & Reseach	ICDAS ARB 2024.00R Page 1 2 3 4 5
123456789_123456789_1	123456789	123456789_123456789_123456789_123456789_123456789_123456789_1	123456789_ 123456789_123456789_123456789_123456789_123456

Arch Bridge Model
Examples

Rendering, Animation &
Vitural Reality

Case Study and
Research

Subscription

Case Study Hangers density determine frequencies of Arch Bridges

This case study applies ICDAS AB 2015.00R

Main Input: He 100, Hs% 25, Ls 100, DZB 12, HangSeg 10

Figures below compared frequencies of arch bridge with reduced hanger's density. All hangers are assumed

non-tensioning and having normal beam element BMS3.

Reference: Hangers Density 7.85t/m3, First & Last node End Releases RY, f_REF=0.405Hz

123456789_123456789_1

123456789

123456789_123456789_123456789_123456789_123456789_123456789_123456789_ 123456789_123456789_123456789_123456789_1234567

123456789_123456789_1

123456789

Reference: The hangers are visible. The centre hanger is 22.4m long, having a big vibrational amplitude
that make the bridge vibration invisible.

Case1: Hangers Density 7.85t/m3, First & Last node End Fixed Rotation RY

f=0.872=2.14f_REF. The hangers fixed rotation increase the natural frequencies significantly!

Case2: Hangers Density (7.85*0.10)t/m3, First & Last node End Releases RY.

f=0.943=2.33f_REF. The hangers vibration are visible together with the bridge.

Case3: Hangers Density (7.85*0.010)t/m3, First & Last node End Releases RY.

f=0.948=2.34f_REF. The hangers weight are almost overlooked with only 1% of density, the hangers are
vibrated without local amplitudes compared to Case2 (10% of density).

Case3: In 3D View. See Animation

Page 1 2 3 4 5

Updated 20-06-2018

123456789_123456789_1	123456789	ICDAS • Hans Erik Nielsens Vej 3 • DK-3650 Ølstykke • E-mail: th@icdas.dk • Tel.: +45 60 53 83 79 • CVR no.: 34436169