ARCHES including sap2000

THE USE OF ARCHES

Memorial arch

Arch bridge

Roof support structures

Arched roof structures including domes

Arched cables

Wall penetration

Arched buildings

etc.
Traditional bridge, Chhina
Garden scene, Suchou
The arch is part of the frame family, but distinguishes itself by
providing a continuous one-member enclosure without having any
abrupt kink points along the geometry. The internal forces flow
smoothly along the arch and are not concentrated at points of
sudden change of form, assuming that the external loads are
distributed evenly; concentrated loads ideally should be located at
kink points.

The use of arches in architecture has a long history. In Europe, the

semicircular arches of the Romans were adopted again as an
essential part of architecture during the Romanesque period.
Transformation from the round arch to the slender pointed arch
happened in the Gothic period about nine hundred years ago. In
contrast to high-pointed arches are the flat, segmental arches used
for bridges during the Renaissance period in Italy. Today, arches
have an important place in architecture in defining building spaces
and as bridges in public spaces. The infinite possible applications of
the arch principle can only be suggested by
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT
In the past, the arch together with the barrel
arch and the arch-like vault were among the
few structural systems that made it possible to
span larger distances by using masonry with its
low tensile capacity. Probably the first arches
built were based on the corbelling principle,
where horizontal masonry courses projected
slightly beyond the previous course. These
corbeled arches are false arches that do not
develop lateral thrust, which is the basic
characteristic of true arches.
Treasury of Atreus, c. 1325
BC, Mycenae
Ishtar Gate (reconstructed), Babylon, c. 575 BC
Palace of Ctesiphon,
now Taq-i-Kisra, near
Bagdad, Iraq, c. 400 AD
The Roman Aqueduct, Segovia, Spain,
50 AD
Coliseum, Rom, Italy, 80 AD
Interior, Coliseum, Rom, Italy, 80 AD
Constantine Basilica,
Trier, Germany, 310 AD
Cathedral of Notre Dame de Paris, 1150 - 1220
Notre Dame de Paris,
1150 -1220
 Thrusts in flying buttresses
(left) and structure of a groin
vault (above)
Amiens Cathedral,
Amiens, France, 1269
Amiens Cathedral,
France, 1269
Notre Dame de Paris
St. Pierrre, Beauvais, 1247
 Notre Dame de Paris:
North Rose Window.
Suspended in perfect
equilibrium on a web of
stone, the immense north
rose window remains
17 m
intact after 700 years, its
intricately interlocking
blocks so exact they ring
when struck. Though
individual blocks may be
removed for repairs
without collapsing the
whole, only minor
buckling has occurred
13 m
Notre Dame de Paris. Schematic sections showing the flying buttresses
Bourges Cathedral,
France, 1214. Most
efficient flying
buttress system ever
constructed.
Sections through various French Gothic Cathedrals, showing progressive
development
Cathedral of Palma, Majorca - photoelastic Study by Robert Mark
St. Lorenz,
Nuremberg, 1500,
St. Mary, Pirna, Germany, beginning 16th cent.
Construction
of a Gothic
cathedral
Santa Maria del Fiore, Florence, Italy. Begun in 1296. Segmented dome added by Brunelleschi in
1436. 42 m span, 91 m high.. Built without centering
Santa Maria del Fiore,
Florence, Italy.
Begun in 1296. Dome
added by Brunelleschi
in 1436.
42 m span, 91 m high.
Built without
centering
Shape is arch a quinto
acuto
Dome of Santa Maria del Fiore,
Florence, is not hemispherical,
but is made up of 8 segments.
Centenary Hall, Breslau, Ger. (now Wroclaw,
Pol.), Max Berg, 1913, Dyckerhoff & Widmann
Ponte Vecchio Bridge, Florence, 1367
Ponte Santas Trinita, Florence, 1569
Rialto Bridge, Venice, 1591
Anji Bridge located in Zhaoxian County of Hebei Province was built in the Sui
Dynasty (581-618). Anji Bridge is a single span stone arch bridge in China, and it is also
the oldest extant bridge of China. It is also known as the Zhaozhou Bridge with a history
of about 1,400 years, it is reputed as The First Bridge Under Sky.
It may have been Robert Hook (1670), who was the first to relize from a
scientific point of view that the catenary is the funicular response of the
arch weight.

Christopher Wren introduced the concept of the catenary dome shape

with the conical brick dome supporting the cupola of St. Pauls Cathedral,
London (1970).

But Giovanni Poleni was the first to actually use a model of string and
lead weights to obtain the thrust line of St. Peter in Rome (1743) and thus
was able to make his recommendations for the number of tension rings
required to prevcent bfurther cracking of the cupola.
Dome of St Peters Basilica, Rome, Michaelangelo, 1546
Hanging chain analysis of Dome of St Peters, by Giovani Poleni, 1742
St Pauls Cathedral, London, 1710, Christopher Wren
Hookes hanging chain concept applied to the dome of Christopher Wrens
St Pauls Cathedral. The lantern on top of the dome distorts the chain
St Pauls Cathedral Dome
(3 domes inside each other)
Interior of Carmel Mission. Built in
1793 it is an interesting design in that
the walls curve inward towards the
top, and the roof consists of a series
of inverted catenary arches built of
native sandstone quarried from the
nearby Santa Lucia Mountains.
(Carmel, CA)
Arched Bridge, the Summer Palace in Beijing, China, 1750
Antoni Gaudi (1852 1926) revived
the idea of funicular curves of the
loads in his search for the true nature
of form. He derived arch shapes from
suspended scale models so as to
achieve purity of form and maximum
efficiency of materials.

Gaudi also used parabolic arches as an

approximation for catenary curves
Sagrada Familia Cathedral,
Barcelona, 1982 - , Antoni Gaudi
The nearly 100-ft span cast iron bridge
at Coalbrookdale over the Severn, UK,
1772, is often considered as a turning
point from stone and brick as the
dominant material for arches, to iron.
The new material of iron and later steel
made long spans and new building types
possible.
St. Pancras Station, London, 1868, 240 ft (73 m)
Galerie des Machines (375 ft, 114 m), Paris, 1889, Dutert and Contamin
Frames: 375-ft (114 m) span steel arches for the Galerie des Machines (1889), Dutert
and Contamin
Galerie des Machines (375 ft, 114 m),
Paris, 1889, Dutert and Contamin
Grande Halle de la Villette, Paris, 1867
Viaduc de Garabit,
Saint-Flour, Cantal, 1884,
Gustave Eiffel
Eiffel Tower (300 m), Paris, 1889, Gustave Eiffel
Glass-vaulted Gallerias in Brussels, Milane, etc.
end of 19th century
New Dresden Main Train Station, Dresden, 2006, Foster
Dresden Central Railway
Sttation, 2006, Norman
Foster Arch, Happold Eng.
Lisbon Oriente Bus Station , Lisbon,
Santiago Calatrava, 1998
Stadelhofen Railway Station, Zurich,
1984, Santiago Calatrava
Firth of Forth Bridge (1708 ft), Scotland, 1890, Benjamin Baker, John Fowler
DOUBLE CANTILEVER
STRUCTURES
Thonet's first bentwood rocking chair, upholstered, 1860, Thonet Brothers, Austria
The Chaise longue, c. 1928, Le Corbusier
Paimio chair, 1932, Alvar Aalto; bent laminated birch frame, solid birch, with
painted bent plywood seat
Salignatobel Bridge, Switzerland, 1930, Robert Maillart
Arve Bridge, Vesay, Switzerland, 1935, Robert Maillart
Dorton (Raleigh) Arena, 1952,
North Carolina, Matthew Nowicki,
with Frederick Severud
Institute of Public
Administration, Ahmedabad,
India, 1963, Louis Kahn
Gateway arch (630 ft), St. Louis, 1963, Eero Saarinen
This free-standing arch is 630 ft. high and the world's tallest. Built of triangular section
of double-walled stainless steel, the space between the skins being filled with concrete
after each section was placed. Looks like perfect inverted catenary shape
 The Geometry of the Arch
Arches may be composed of different types of curves. The
most common ones are derived from

conic sections. They are the circle, ellipse, parabola, and

hyperbola but also the

cycloid should be mentioned.

Curves can be used as single-, double-, or multiple-curvature

systems, in other words they can consist of various curvilinear
segments. With respect to circular curves, arches can be one-
centered (e.g. semi-circular, segmental), two-centered, and
multi-centered. There are innumerable ways basic curves may
be combined to yield various arch profiles. The most common
arches are based on circular and parabolic geometry.
FROM THE HARMONY OF NATURE
TO THAT OF ARCHITECTURE
National Stadium of Sports Affairs
Council, Toyo Ito & Associates,
Kaohsiung, Taiwan, 2009
National Stadium of Sports
Affairs Council, Toyo Ito &
Associates, Kaohsiung,
Taiwan, 2009
 CONTEMPORARY ARCHES

ARCH USE: BRIDGES, BUILDING ENCLOSURES, ROOF

STRUCTURES, SUPPORT STRUCTURS, WALL ARCHES, COMPRESSION
RINGS, SUSPENDED ARCHES, TREES, MONUMENTS, etc.
ARCHES
BRIDGES
Examples of arched bridges
Route 112 Bridge, Huntington, MA, using SAP
pedestrian bridge at Seattle's Museum of
Flight, 2007, SRG Partnership
Based on an original drawing by Leonardo da Vinci, Oslo, 2001, Vebjrn Sand
Ponte della Constituzione , Venice, 2007
Santiago Calatrava
Bent wood bridge, Esslingen, Germany, 1986, R. Dietrich
Pedestrian bridge in Cologne, Germany
Barqueta Bridge, Seville, Spain, 1992, Santiago Calatrava
Bac de Roda Felipe II Bridge,
1987, Barcelona, S. Calatrava
La Devesa Footbridge, Ripoll, Spain, 1991, S. Calatrava, torsion
The 100-m span tied arch Japan Bridge in Paris (1993, Kisho Kurokawa) consists of the two
main inward leaning tubular steel arches, the walkway of triangular precast concrete panels
covered by a curved glass enclosure, and the support of the arched spatial cable-strut
network. The walkway and glass enclosure are suspended from the arches. The lateral arch
thrust is taken by the cable-strut network at the base. Torsion due to lateral loads is efficiently
resisted by the triangular cross-section of the bridge (i.e. torsion box).
Bridge over the Rhein-Herne-Chanel, BUGA 97 Gelsenkirchen, Germany, 1997, Stefan Polnyi
Brcke ber den Rhein-Herne-Kanal,
BUGA 97 Gelsenkirchen

Asymmetrie bei Vollast

wegen asymmetrischer Anordnung
(Prof. Dr. Stefan Polnyi)

Der Gehweg kreuzt den Kanal im Grundriss

unter ca. 70/110 Winkeln.
Die Bgen stehen genau senkrecht zum Kanal.
Die Gesamtkonstruktion ist punktsymmetrisch
zum Mittelpunkt des Gehweges.
Beide Bgen sind identische
Sttzlinienkonstruktionen fr Vollbelastung,
jedoch ist der einzelne Bogen asymmetrisch.
Wegen der Stellung des einzelnen Bogens zum
Gehweg sind die identischen Bgen
gegeneinander um 180 im Grundriss verdreht.
Da die Bgen im Grundriss den Gehweg kreuzen
(an jedem Ufer zwei Auflager an einer
Brckenseite), mssen die Anlenkpunkte der
Seile am Bogen so gewhlt werden, dass das
Lichtraumprofil frei gehalten wird. Auerhalb
der Anlenkpunkte sind die Bgen ideal gerade.
Oberbaumbruecke, Berlin, 1995, Santiago Calatrava
Proposal train station, Florence, Italy, 2007, Arata
Isozaki, Mutsuro Sasaki
Bus Stop, Aachen, 1998, Peter Eisenman
 ARCHES as
ROOFSUPPORT
STRUCTURES
The Metro station at Blaak, Rotterdam, 1993, Harry Reijnders of Movares; the arch
spans 62.5 m, dome diameter is 35 m
Ice hokey stadium, Munich,
1985, Kurt Ackermann
Lanxess Arena, Cologne, 1998, Peter Bhm Architekten
Olympic Stadium OAKA, Athens, Greece, 2004, Santiago Calatrava
Complex canopy
 ARCHES AS
ROOF
STRUCTURES
Arched structure, computer model
New York World Trade Center
Transportation Hub, 2016
Santiago Calatrava
New York World Trade Center
Transportation Hub, 2016
Santiago Calatrava
Media and Study Centre, D.
Hosiassohn (Sketch
program)
St. Dominque, 2001, Gifu Design: ,Takenaka
Deutsche-Med, Rostock, 2004, Helmut
Jahn, Werner Sobek
Student Housing IIT, Chicago,
2003, Helmut Jahn
Office building of the European
Investment Bank, 2009, Luxembourg,
Ingenhoven Architects
Office building of the European
Investment Bank, 2009, Luxembourg,
Ingenhoven Architects
Museum of
Contemporary Art,
Helsinki, Finland, 1998,
Steven Holl, Arup +
Nordenson
Ningbo Air Terminal
Ningbo Air Terminal
Sportscenter Dalian, China
Beijing Capital International
Airport - Terminal 2, 1999
Inchon Airport, Seoul , 2002, Terry Farrel
Beijing International Airport Terminal 3,
2008, Norman Foster, Arup
EXPO-Dach Hannover, Arch.: Herzog und Partner, Ing.: Julius Natterer, 2000
Autobahnraststtte, Arch. & Ing.: Heinz Isler, Deitingen 1968
Bodegas Protos,
Peafiel, Valladolid,
Spain, 2008, Richard
Rogers, Arup
Ferrari Restaurant, Maranello, Italy. 2008, Marco Visconti
Olympic Stadium Montreal, Canada, 1975, Roger Taillibert
Bordeaux Law Courts, 1998, Richard Rogers, Arup
Harajuku Protestant Church,
Kita-Aoyama, Tokyo, Ciel Rouge
Creation, Kaneko Fumiko &
Henri Gueydan, Tokyo, 2005
Sustainable towers in Malaysia, 2008, Studio Nicoletti
Allianz Stadium Railway Station Froettmanning, Munich, 2006
Airport Terminal Newark
Peek & Cloppenburg,
Cologne, Germany, 2005,
Renzo Piano
National Museum of the Marine Corps
and Heritage Center, Quantico, Virginia
USA, 2006, Fentress Bradburn Architects,
Weidlinger
San Giovanni Rotondo,
Foggia, Italy, 2004, Renzo
Piano
Pilgrimage church Padre
Mio, Renzo Piano

The Dome is supported by

21 prestressed stone
arches.

In plan view, the structure

appears spiral shaped
converging into a dome
structure consisting of
11 arches along the outer
ring and 10 arches along
the inner ring
The shape of the arches
corresponds to the pressure
line (asymmetrical)
-> the arch is only under
compression
Konstruktionaufnahme von
Druck:jeweils 5 Steine sind zu
einem Segment verschraubt

(Montage) Segmente werden

ber Zapfenverbindung in
Position gehaltenLehrgerst fr
Montage fr Lastfall Erdbeben
werden nach Montage 2
Stahlseile durch den Bogen
gefhrt und gespannt
druckbeanspruchte Steinbgen
Vouten am Sto von Segmenten
haben gestalterische Funktion

Fundamente zur Aufnahme der

Horizontalkrfte ausgebildet
Center Paul Klee, Bern, Switzerland, 2007, Renzo Piano Building Workshop , Arup
Barajas Airport, Madrid, Spain, 2004, Richard Rogers,
Anthony Hunt Associates (main structure), Arup (main
faade)
Floating Pavilion, Groningen,
Netherland, 1997, Fumihico
Maki
Milwaukee Art Museum, Santiago Caloatrava
Lisbone Orient Station, Lisbone, Portugal, 1998, Santiago Calatrava
Lige Guillemins TGV Station, Lige, Belgium, 2008, Santiago Calatrava
Documentation Center
Nazi Party Rally
Grounds, Nuremberg,
2001, Guenther Domenig
ZhongGuanCun West Office, Beijing, 2006, Kohn Pederson Fox Assoc
Central Chinese Television
(CCTV) Tower, Beijing, 2008,
Koolhaas and Ole Scheeren/OMA
Iglesia de la Medalla
Milagrosa, Navarte, Mexico
City, 1955, Felix Candela
Satolas Airport TGV Train
Station, Lyons, France, 1995,
Santiago Calatrava
BCE Place, Toronto, 1992, Santiago Calatrava
City of Arts and Sciences, Valencia, Spain, 1996, Santiago Calatrava
Les Halles, Paris, 1979, Claude Vasconi and Georges Pencreac'h
Vaillant Arena , Davos, Switzerland, 1981
United Airlines Terminal at
OHare Airport, Chicago,
1987, H. Jahn
Minute Maid Field, Houston, 2000,
HOK Sport
Atrium, Germanisches Museum, Nuremberg, Germany
Jaegerpassage, Leipzig, Germany
The Kimmel Center for Performing Arts, Philadelphia, 2003, Vinoly
Neue Messe Leipzig, 1996,
Gerkan, Marg und Partner
National Grand Theater, Beijing, 2005, Paul Andreu
Olympic Stadium, Montreal, 1976, Roger Taillibert
Montreal Biodome (The Montreal Olympic Velodrome ), 1978, Roger Taillibert
Bangkok International Airport, 2006, Murphy/Jahn, Werner Sobek
The new International Terminal at San Francisco International Airport, 2001, SOM
Stuttgart Airport, Terminal 1, Germany, 1991, von Gerkan, Schlaich
Beijing Capital
International
Airport -
Terminal 3,
2008, N. Foster
Kansai International Airport
Passenger Terminal Building, 1994,
Renzo Piano, Ove Arup (Peter
Rice)
3/6/2016 332
Shenyang Airport
Exchange House, London, 1990, SOM
Berlin Stock Exchange, Berlin,
Germany, 1999, Nick Grimshaw
Tekla Xsteel
Cathedral of Christ the Light, Oakland, CA, 2008, SOM
The Response of Roof Arches to Loading

FUNICULAR COMPRESSION SYSTEMS

BRACED ARCHES
COMPOSITE SYSTEMS AND FORM-RESISTANT STRUCTURES
ARCHES WITH PRESTRESSED TENSILE WEBS
 Construction of a Circular Arch with SAP

1) Just draw a single line between the arch supports.

2) Select the arch member (only one member may be selected at a time) to
be meshed.
3) From the Edit menu select Mesh Curved Frame/Cable command to
access the Curve Parameters form. From the Type of Circular Curve drop-
down list select a predefined curve such as Circular Arc Planar Point &
Radius
4) Enter the Radius and a value for the Number of Divisions in this edit box
to specify the meshing of the generated curved frame/cable element.
5) Click the Insert button and SAP2000 will calculate the coordinates of the
curve automatically based on the Number of Divisions specified. The curve
will be displayed in plan in the display area on the right-hand side of the
Curve Parameters form.
6) Click OK button and the arch will appear on the screen but not in the xz-
plane, it must be rotated to its proper location: select all (i.e. arc), then Edit,
then Replicate, then Radial, then Rotate About XLine, then check
Coordinates of Point on YZ Plane, then check Angle of rotation using
increments of 450, and check Delete Original Objects, then OK.
Graphic statics
Funicular Compression Structures
By arranging material along the opposite profile of a sagging cable, it is
possible to make a spanning structure that works in pure compression.
It is common to use arches with pin supports and an internal hinge
connection. This configuration is called a three-hinged arch. They were
particularly popular in the 19th and early 20th centuries because they
are statically determinate.
Unbalanced Loading
Unlike cables, which can reconfigure to a different stable profile when the load
pattern changes, arches cannot.
A loading that does not correspond to the arch's funicular profile will be called a
non-funicular loading or unbalanced loading.
There are two possible responses to unbalanced loading:
The structure develops internal shear and moment to compensate for the
difference between the funicular profile of the load and its own profile.
The structure becomes unstable and collapses.
Since the first option is preferred, it is generally necessary to design arch
structures for shear and moment.
Typically, the profile is based on the funicular profile corresponding to dead load
acting alone, and the arch rib is designed to resist shear and bending moments
resulting from unbalanced live loads.
Arch structures sometimes vary from the dead-load funicular profile for
architectural or functional reasons.
a) Bgen werden vor allem auf DRUCK belastet.

b) Die umgekehrte Seillinie heit STTZLINIE. Wenn ein Bogen die

Form der Sttzlinie hat, wird er nur auf Druck belastet.
Vorteil: verhltnismig schlanke Konstruktionen, weil nur
druckbelastet.
Problem: bei wechselnden Lasten (Verkehrslast, Wind) entstehen
Momente im Bogen
auch Bgen mssen stabilisiert werden!

c) Bgen lsen HORIZONTALKRFTE in den Auflagern aus (Druck

nach auen).
die Gre der Horizontalkrfte ist vom Stich des Bogens
abhngig:
groer Stich - kleine Horizontalkrfte
kleiner Stich - groe Horizontalkrfte

wenn die Horizontalkrfte nicht aufgenommen werden knnen,

kann ein gebogenes Tragwerk nicht als Bogen - also
druckbeansprucht - wirken.
(es ist dann ein gekrmmter Biegetrger, der nur
momentenbeansprucht ist)
FUNICULAR LINE
 The Response of Roof Arches to Loading

Parabolic arches and circular arches behave differently under loading

unless there are shallow and have a height-to-san ratio of h/L 1/8,
in which case the circular arch can be treated as a parabolic one for
preliminary design purposes.
Under uniform, gravity load action on the horizontal projection, the pressure
line coincides with the centroidal axis, or the parabolic arch is the funicular
shape for the given loading. Hence there is no bending and no shear along the
arch; the forces are resisted in purely axial manner. The maximum axial force
Nmax appears at the reaction.
The dead load, however, acts as a uniform load along the arch, for which the
funicular response is a catenary. Because of the complex mathematical nature
of the form, it is often approximated by a second-degree parabola, especially
when the parabola is shallow. Hence, dead load action may be approximated
as a horizontal uniform load and considered similar to snow loading
The critical moments for a parabolic arch occur under asymmetrical uniform
live loading across one-half of the arch. The maximum and minimum
moments for a three-hinge arch are located at quarter spans and are equal to,

M = wLL2/64
The same equations can also be used for preliminary design purposes for two-
hinged and fixed arches.
Uniform load on projection

-> pressure line (funicular line) is a

parabola
-> centroidal line of arch is a parabola
-> arch is a parabola
hence, the arch does not deviate
from the pressure line
-> there is only compression !

The arch does not carry any moments

Single load

-> pressure line deviates from the

geometry of the arch
-> hence the arch must carry moments
in addition to compression
-> moments at any location are equal
to axial force, N, times the distance
of the pressure line from the
centroidal axis of the arch, e:
M = Ne
Uniform load on half the span

-> pressure line has a belly

-> hence the parabolic arch

deviates from the pressure
line

-> hence the arch must carry

moments in addition to
compression
Arch is slender

-> pressure line are

outside the member
section
-> the moments
increase with the
increase of (e), the
distance between
centroidal line and
pressure line
-> Because of the
larger moments
material must be able
to resist tension: e.g.
reinforced concrete,
steel, wood
Thick arch
-> the pressure line falls within
the arch section
-> moments are small
tensile stresses are small
-> masonry can be used

Arch action primarily in

compression
 wL

M min = Ne e
Mmax

h
N
H H

Av Bv
/2
/2

L
Typically, an arch's profile is based on the funicular profile corresponding
to dead load acting alone, and the arch rib is designed to resist shear and
bending moments resulting from unbalanced live loads. The arch must be
designed to resist both extremes.
Gaudi
Only compressive
construction (brick)
construction follows the
pressure line.
Colonia Guell crypt, Barcelona, 1915, Antoni Gaudi
Funicular shape under uniform loads
Berlin Stock
Exchange, Berlin
(Grimshaw, London)

- The main support

structure is a
2-hinge arch

- The floor framing

hangs on the arches
in a uniform manner
(assuming uniform
floor loads) -
Neue Messe Leipzig

Arch has a deep cross

section, therefore the
pressure line falls
within the section
causing primarily
compression in the
trussed member

fixed arch
 STATICALLY DETERMINACY
Dreigelenkbogen
statisch BESTIMMTES System
ohne Zwngungen
alle Sttzlinien gehen durch die 3 Gelenke (Momenten-
Nullpunkte)
gnstig fr den Transport (1/2 Bogen kann vorgefertigt und
transportiert werden)

Zweigelenkbogen
1-fach statisch UNBESTIMMT
geringer Unterschied zum 3-Gelenkbogen,
Kfteverlauf sehr hnlich, da sowieso kaum Momente
auftreten

Eingespannter Bogen
3-fach statisch UNBESTIMMT
Einspannung (= Momente) in den Auflagern

Ausfhrung:
- bei sehr groen Krften
- wenn Aussteifung quer nicht mglich
BCE Place, Toronto, 1992,
Santiago Calatrava

-> Two-hinge arch

-> Steep arch with small
thrust forces
 wL

M min = Ne e
Mmax

h
N
H H

Av Bv
/2
/2

L
For the preliminary design of three-hinged circular roof arches considering
only gravity loading, one may use the following approximations:

Shallow arches (h/L 1/8): treat circular arches as parabolic arches, use

M = wLL2/64

Intermediate arches (1/8 < h/L 1/3) for the rise-to-span ratios between
steep and shallow roof arches, circular arches may be considered as parabolic
arches for first-approximation purposes, although the effect of dead load causing
bending must be considered.

Mmax - wDh2/8 - wLL2/64

Ignored are safely the difference in location between the two moments.

Steep circular arches (h/L > 1/3) use

Mmax = - wh2/8
Design of: parabolic arch: Mmax = wLL2/64 = 0.5(40)2/64 = 12.5 k-ft
0.75(12.5 + 14.55) = 20.29 k-ft (COMB4)
S 1.15Mb/Fb = 1.15(20.29)12/24 = 11.67 in.3
try W8 x 15, Sx = 11.8 in.3

semicircular arch: -Mmax = wh2/8 = 1.0(20)2/8 = 50 k-ft

0.75(-50 - 8) = -43.5 k-ft (COMB3)
S 1.10Mb/Fb = 1.10(50)12/24 = 27.5 in.3

try W8 x 35, Sx = 31.2 in.3

 Parabolic arch:
Mmax wwh2/5.5 = 0.2(20)2/5.5 = 14.55 k-ft

Semicircular arch:
Mmax wwh2/4.5 = 0.2(20)2/4.5 = 17.78 k-ft
Mmin -wwh2/10 = -0.2(20)2/10 = -8 k-ft

wind loading
 Parabolic arch:

Mmax= -PL/16 = -2(40)/16 = -5 k-ft

Semicircular arch:

Mmax -PL/10= -2(40)/10 = -8 k-ft

Single load at crown

PARABOLIC ARCH
Intermediate arches,
h/L = 10/40 =

Parabolic arch

Design based on left side:

CIRCULAR ARCH

+Mmax = wLL2/64 =
0.5(40)2/64 = 12.5 k-ft

S 1.25Mb/Fb =
1.25(12.5)12/24 = 7.81 in.3

try W8 x 13, Sx = 9.91 in.3

Circular arch:
Design based on right side:

Mmax - wDh2/8 - wLL2/64 = - 0.5(10)2/8 12.5 = -6.25 12.5 = -18.75 k-ft

S 1.20Mb/Fb = 1.20(18.75)12/24 = 11.25 in.3

try W8 x 15, Sx = 11.8 in.3

 Parabolic arch:

Mmax= - PL/16
= -2(40)/16 = -5 k-ft

Semicircular arch:

Mmax 1.2(- PL/16)

= 1.2(-5) = -6 k-ft

Single load at crown

 PARABOLIC ARCH

CIRCULAR ARCH

Treat the shallow arches as parabolic arches for preliminary design purposes
because of the rise-to-span ratio h/L = 5/40 = 1/8
Mmax = wL L2/64 = 0.5(40)2/64 = 12.5 k-ft
S 1.35Mb/Fb = 1.35(12.5)12/24 = 8.44 in.3
try W8 x 13, Sx = 9.91 in.3
SAP requires a W8 x 15
PARABOLIC ARCH

CIRCULAR ARCH

Single crown load:

Mmax= PL/16 = 2(40)/16 = 5 k-ft

Bent beam

-> The connection at the top is

hinged and cannot resist any
horizontal forces

-> the column carries only

vertical reaction forces

-> the right foundation only

carries vertical reaction forces

-> the structure is a bent beam

The arch is a bent beam which
cannot resist lateral thrust forces

-> the reaction forces are only

vertical

-> the bent member acts as a

beam carrying only moments

The walls cannot provide

resistance to horizontal loads ->
the arch is simply a bent beam.
- the tie rod resist horizontal
forces

-> the arch can transfer the

lateral thrust forces and acts only
in compression

-> the forces in the columns carry

only the vertical reaction forces

The horizontal arch forces are

resisted by the tie rod
Between 2 arches, the H-
forces cancel each other

- However, at the end there is

no counteracting H-force
available

-The reaction force of the arch

will be outside the brick

- However, there acts also the

superimposed brick loads from
above

- With this superimposed load

the reaction load stays within
the brick wall -> it is a true
arch
- the brick column at the end
is too thin so that no
horizontal forces can be
resisted

- therefore it cannot be a arch

from a statical point of view

- because only vertical forces

can be resisted, a lintel must
be provided on top of the arch
(hidden) to act as a beam to
transfer the forces
Cargolifterhalle, Berlin
Brand

Largest free-span hall on

Earth (2000)
width: 210 m
length: 360 m
height: 107 m
Arches consist of 4 trusses
with a fabric membrane
spanning between
 8'

a b

c d

40'
First, the geometry input for modeling the arches must be determined.
The radius, R, for the shallow arch (Fig. 7.7A) according to Eq. (7.7), is

R = (4h2 + L2)/8h = (4(8)2 + 402)/8(8) = 29 ft

The location of the span L as related to the center of the circle is defined
by the radial angle o according to Eq. (7.8).

sin o= (L/2)/R =20/29 = 0.69, o = 43.600

Now three grid spaces with the following grid spacing along radial angles
are selected,

o/n = 43.600/3=14.530

The circular arch length, l, according to Eq. (7.9), is

l = R(o/900) = (29)43.60/90 = 44.14 ft

The arch length, l, for the semicircular arch, is

l = R = (20) = 62.83 ft
To model the geometry of the arches in SAP the following values are selected:

Global grid system: grid spacing in X direction: 4 ft using 24 spaces

grid spacing in Y direction: 4 ft using 24 spaces
grid spacing in Z direction: 4 ft using 15 spaces

Cylindrical grid system: CSYS1 for case A:

grid spacing along Radius: 29 ft using 1 space
radial angles along Theta: 14.53 deg using 6 spaces
spacing of curves along Z direction: 29 ft using 1 space

The circular sector must be rotated 90 43.60 deg = 46.40 deg counterclockwise
about the Z axis.

CSYS2 for Case C:

grid spacing along Radius: 20 ft using 1 space
radial angles along Theta: 15 deg using 12 spaces
spacing of curves along Z direction: 20 ft using 1 space

Duplicate full arches and delete portions to obtain the one-half arches.
Mmax wL2/162 = 0.8(240)2/162 = 284 k-ft (SAP 310 k-ft)
Where the triangular load: w (0.020 + 0.018)240/36 = 0.8 k/ft

S 1.10Mb/Fb = 1.10(284)12/24 = 156.2 in3

Try W24 x 76, S = 176 in3

Ribbed domes
798 Beijing Art Factory, Beijing, 1956
 COMPOSITE SYSTEMS AND FORM-RESISTANT STRUCTURES

An example of an asymmetrical arch system is shown in the next slide. Here the supports are
at different levels and a long-span arch and a short arch support each other, in other words
the crown hinge is located off-center.

The relatively shallow asymmetrical arch system constitutes a nearly funicular response in
compression under uniform load action since the circular geometry approaches the parabolic
one; notice that the location of the hinge is of no importance. Hence, live loading for each arch
separately must be considered in order to cause bending, while the dead load is carried in
nearly pure compression action; the long arch on the right side clearly carries the largest
moments. Superimposing the pressure lines of the two loading cases results in a
composite funicular polygon that looks like the shape of two inclined bowstring trusses, hence
suggesting a good design solution. For long-span arches the use of triangular space trusses
may be advantageous.

Under asymmetrical loading on the long arch, the long arch acts in compression and the
bottom chord in tension to resist the large positive bending moment. However, the bottom
chord of the short arch acts in compression and the top chord in tension under the negative
bending moment. But should the bottom member be straight, then it resists directly the
compression force due to the live load in funicular fashion leaving no axial force or moment in
the arch.
Under asymmetrical loading on the short arch, the bottom chord of the long truss will resist
the compression force directly, hence causing no moment or axial force in the arch if it would
be a compression member. But since it is a tension member, there must be enough tension due
to the weight of the long-span in the member to suppress the compression force!
Pressure lines in elevation

Plan view
It is common to vary the depth of the rib member according to the
pattern of the moment for unbalanced loading.
Lehrter Bahnhof, Berlin, 2002, Gerkan, Marg & Partner, Mero
 2.68'
C.

10'

30 deg
60 deg Bh
17.32'
Bv
10'
30 deg

a. Ah
20' 17.32'
Av

2.68'

7.32'
5.86'

17.32'

4.29'

10' 27.32'
b.
 Mmax

k
.10
10
7.70 k
Mmin
5.86'

4.29'

10' 27.32'
Waterloo Terminal, London, 1993, Nicholas Grimshaw
+ Anthony Hunt
 BRACED ARCHES
When arches are braced or prestressed by tensile elements, they are
stabilized against buckling, and deformations due to various loading
conditions and the corresponding moments are minimized, which in turn
results in reduction of the arch cross-section. The stabilization of the arch
through bracing can be done in various ways as suggested in Fig. 7.15 and
7.16.

Typical examples of braced arches with non-prestressed web members

are shown in Fig. 7.15. The most basic braced arch is the tied arch (b).
Arches may be supported by a single or multiple compression struts or flying
columns (c, d)). Slender arches may also be braced against buckling with
radial ties at center span (e) as known from the principle of the bicycle
wheel, where the thin wire spokes of the bicycle wheel are prestressed with
sufficient force so that they do not carry compression and buckle due to
external loads; the uniform radial tension produces compression in the outer
circular rim (ring) of the wheel and tension in the inner ring. However, in the
given case, the diagonal members are not prestressed. Here, the three
members at center-span are struts.
Beams obove or
below the arches
carry the moments
due to the varying
live loads
Arches may also be supported by a dense network of overlapping diagonal
tensile members (f); notice, this case represents a pure tensile network.
When loaded on one side the diagonals under the load fold while the diagonal
members on the non-loaded side are placed under tension. In general, however,
depending on the arch proportions (Fig. 7.16) the tensile webbing may have to
be prestressed to remain in tension under any loading condition and to increase
the load carrying capacity and stiffness of the arch. Initially, forces are applied
to certain members during the construction stage so that the structure
counteracts stresses created by external loads.
The design of the unbraced arched portal frame in (a), is controlled by full
uniform gravity loading; here the lateral thrust at the frame knees is resisted
completely in bending. However, when the relatively shallow portion of the arch
is braced by a horizontal tie rod (b), the lateral displacement under full uniform
gravity loading is very much reduced, that is bending decreases substantially
although axial forces will increase. For the tied arch cases without or with flying
column supports for cases (b, c, d)), the design of the critical arch members is
controlled by gravity loading or the combination of half gravity loading together
with wind whereas the design of the web members is controlled by gravity
loading. It is apparent, as the layout of the arch webbing gets denser the arch
moments will decrease further as the structure approaches an axial system. If a
vertical load large enough is applied to the intersection of web members in case
(e) to prestress the radial rod web members, then the entire web members
form a radial tensile network. For further discussion refer to Problem 7.4.
Heavy construction
-> moving loads hardly
have an influence on the
change of pressure lines
Several typical examples of braced arches with non-prestressed web members
are shown in Fig. 9.12. The most basic braced arch is the tied arch (b). Arches may
be supported by a single or multiple compression struts or flying columns (c, d)).
Slender arches may also be braced against buckling with radial ties at center span
(e) as known from the principle of the bicycle wheel, where the thin wire spokes of
the bicycle wheel are prestressed with sufficient force so that they do not carry
compression and buckle due to external loads; the uniform radial tension produces
compression in the outer circular rim (ring) of the wheel and tension in the inner
ring. However, in the given case, the diagonal members are not prestressed. Here,
the three members at center-span are struts.
Arches may also be supported by a dense network of overlapping diagonal
tensile members (f); notice, this case represents a pure tensile network. When
loaded on one side the diagonals under the load fold while the diagonal members
on the non-loaded side are placed under tension. SAP takes into account the
redistribution of forces by treating the cable network in case (f), for example, as
tension-only members by performing a nonlinear static analysis. In general,
however, depending on the arch proportions the tensile webbing may have to be
prestressed to act more efficiently under any loading condition and to increase the
load carrying capacity and stiffness of the arch.
The cable-braced, latticed, tied-arch in Fig. 9.12g approaches the behavior of a
truss; the cable network substantially reduces bending moments in the arch and tie
beam where the bottom loads prestress the arch. For fast approximation purposes
use the beam analogy (see also Fig. 6.3g).
 10'

a d
6'

12'

b e
c f
10'

L = 40'

g
 ARCHES WITH PRESTRESSED TENSILE WEBS

The spirit of the delicate roof structure of the Lille Euro Station, Lille,
France as shown in the following conceptual drawing (1994, Jean-Marie
Duthilleul/ Peter Rice), reflects a new generation of structures aiming for
lightness and immateriality. This new technology features construction with
its own aesthetics reflecting a play between artistic, architectural,
mathematical, and engineering worlds. The two asymmetrical transverse
slender tubular steel arches (set at about 12 m or 40 ft on center) with
diameters of around one-hundredth of their span, are of different radii; the
larger arch has a span of 26 m and the smaller one 18.5 m. The arches are
braced against buckling similar to the spokes of a wheel by deceitfully
disorganized ties and rods; this graceful and light structure, in harmony
with the intimate space, was not supposed to look right but to reflect a
spirit of ambiguity. The roof does not sit directly on the arches, but on a
series of slender tubes that are resting on the arches which, in turn, carry
the longitudinal cable trusses that support the undulating metal roof. The
support structure allowed the gently curved roof almost to float or to free it
from its support, emphasizing the quality of light.
a

10'
20'
500
0 50 0
0 50 0 50
50

b c
50
0

d e
Introducing to the semicircular arch a horizontal tie rod (Fig. 7.16b) at mid-
height, reduces lateral displacement of the arches due to uniform gravity
action substantially, so that the combination of gravity load and wind load
controls now the design rather than primarily uniform gravity loading for an
arch without a tie. Also the moments due to the gravity and wind load
combination are reduced since the tie remains in tension as it transfers part of
the wind load in compression to the other side of the arch. In contrast, when
the arch is braced with a trussed network (Fig. 7.16c) then the arch is
stiffened laterally very much, so that the uniform gravity loading case controls
the design with the corresponding smaller moments.

Similar behavior occurs for the arch placed on the diagonal (Fig. 7.16d, e). As
a pure arch its design is controlled by bending with very small axial forces as
based on gravity loading, in other words it behaves as a flexural system.

However, when prestressed tensile webbing is introduced the moments in the

arch are substantially reduced and the axial forces increased, now the arch
approaches more the behavior of an axial-flexural structure system
requiring much smaller member sizes; also here the controlling load case is
gravity plus prestressing although the design of some members is based on
dead load and prestressing. For further discussion refer to Problem
 PRESTRESSING TENSILE WEBS

To model tensile webs of arches, the web members may have to be

prestressed by applying external prestress forces, or temperature
forces.

With respect to external prestress forces, run the structure as if it were, say
a trussed arch, and determine the compression forces in the web members,
which it naturally cannot support. Then, as a new loading case, apply an
external force, which causes enough tension in the compression member so
that never compression can occur.

With respect to temperature forces, run the structure without prestressing

it, then determine the maximum compression force in the cable members
which should not exist, then apply a negative thermal force (i.e.
temperature decrease causes shortening) to all those members thereby pre-
stressing them, so that they all will be in tension.

To perform the thermal analysis in SAP, select the frame element, then click
Assign, then Frame/Cable Loads, and then Temperature; in the Frame
Temperature Loading dialog box select first Load Case, then Type (i.e.
temperature for uniform constant temperature difference).
Munich Airport Center, Munich, Germany, 1997, Helmut Jahn Arch
Kempinski Hotel, Munich,
Germany, 1997, H. Jahn/Schlaich
Medieval masonry arch passes assessment with LUSAS
masonry arch structure
linear and nonlinear analysis
load capacity of structure proved

Sheffield City Councils Design and Property (Structures Division) used LUSAS Bridge to undertake an assessment
(strength) check of High Bridge, a 13th century quadripartite arch bridge on behalf of Lincolnshire County Council, the
bridges owner. High Bridge, which carries Lincolns main pedestrian thoroughfare, had been structurally assessed twice
before with conflicting outcomes. The LUSAS analysis provided an independent third assessment and proved the structure
was safe for the imposed loading.
The first of the earlier analyses failed the structure and concluded that the bridge was inadequate for pedestrian loading
due to permissible tension in the masonry being exceeded. Next, Lincolnshire County Council carried out an in-house
assessment using a serviceability limit state check under nominal loads with a line of thrust method. Unlike the first
analysis, this took the formation of a hinge as the failure criterion, implying an acceptance of tension up to the formation of
the first hinge. This assessment deemed the structure to have passed. Lincolnshires approach was felt to be a more
rational basis for determining failure than the onset of tension since many masonry arches regularly experience tension
and remain perfectly viable structures. Because of this, Sheffield used the plane stress concrete model in LUSAS to mimic
the behaviour of the masonry. An ultimate limit state, rather than serviceability state, analysis was applied, because the
issue was considered to be primarily one of structural safety.
The technique used was to trace crack formation as nominal loads, i.e. without partial load factors, were applied
incrementally with manual amendment of the model between each analysis. Repeated re-appraisal of the structures
stiffness between runs was necessary since the model allows cracks to develop and propagate as the load increases and
the structure degrades. As the model developed, the load factor achieved increased. This procedure continued with the aim
of reaching an acceptable value. To reduce processing time, a series of linear analyses were done prior to a full nonlinear
analysis.
The initial linear analyses determined that out of balance effects from applying pedestrian loading to quarters of the plan
area were minimal. The worst load case was shown to be pedestrian loading of 5kN/m2 over the entire plan of the
structure. This allowed a simpler 3D quarter model to be employed thereafter, giving faster results.
Additional linear analyses found that support conditions were critical to the mode of failure. With the supports rigid in
respect of vertical settlement, as initially modelled, failure in the structures legs occurred very early in the loading regime.
Truly rigid supports were felt to be unrealistic, so springs were introduced, resolving the premature leg failure. A final
refinement was to introduce spring lateral restraints. These replaced the earlier rigid ones (which modelled lateral soil
pressures) since it was felt that complete rigidity was unrealistic and furthermore had caused problems for the legs.
The cumulative effect of all the modelling changes was to raise the structures
load factor to 3.43, an acceptable figure, and proving the safety of High Bridge
for pedestrian loading. Achieving this outcome depended upon certain
assumptions, as well as lateral support derived from the surrounding soil and
adjacent buildings. This point was made clear to the Client in case future
construction or demolition work nearby affected this beneficial soil pressure.
In this analysis the following assumptions are pertinent:
A condition factor of unity was assumed.
Lateral soils pressure was earth pressure at rest.
The only live load was pedestrian at 5 kN/m2.
A linear stress/strain model was assumed, but a parabolic profile is more likely
for masonry.
The compressive strength of masonry was taken as 15 N/mm2.
The formation of tension and hinges were accepted.
Failure was deemed to occur when the analysis failed to converge at the nth
iteration. The load at the n-1th iteration, divided by the nominal load, provided
a load factor value. It is implicit in this approach that cracking is permitted, as
is the formation of one or more hinges, but not a mechanism.
Inflatable arches
China Central
Television (CCTV)
Headquarters,
Beijing, 2008, Rem
Koolhaas and OMA,
Arup