The aim of this paper is to compare each other the main analytical and numerical methods for the assessment of masonry arch bridges, highlighting strengths and weaknesses. The methods are mainly three: i) the Thrust Line Analysis Method; ii) the Mechanism Method; iii) the Finite Element Method. In addition a particular closed-form approach has been recently developed, the Elastio-Plastic Method. The Thrust Line Analysis Method and the Mechanism Method are analytical methods and are based on two of the fundamental theorems of the Plastic Analysis, while the Finite Element Method is a numerical method that uses different strategies of discretization to analyze these structures.

Comparison between available assessment methods of historical masonry arches

Lucio Nobile;
2017

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to compare each other the main analytical and numerical methods for the assessment of masonry arch bridges, highlighting strengths and weaknesses. The methods are mainly three: i) the Thrust Line Analysis Method; ii) the Mechanism Method; iii) the Finite Element Method. In addition a particular closed-form approach has been recently developed, the Elastio-Plastic Method. The Thrust Line Analysis Method and the Mechanism Method are analytical methods and are based on two of the fundamental theorems of the Plastic Analysis, while the Finite Element Method is a numerical method that uses different strategies of discretization to analyze these structures.
2017
Lucio Nobile;Veronica Bartolomeo
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/624850
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact