Structural analysis and design of a self-supporting wooden bridge designed by Leonardo Da Vinci
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X86798Keywords:
Bridge, Support reaction, Structure, LoadAbstract
Leonardo Da Vinci created several bridges throughout his life, including a highly practical self-supporting bridge. This research aimed to investigate the geometry of the self-supporting bridge structure, the transmission of loads along the bars, and to conduct sizing simulations. Initially, calculations were developed for the length, height, and angles of the bridge. Subsequently, support reactions for each bar composing the bridge were calculated, followed by the sizing of the bridge considering wood as the material used. Finally, simulations were conducted for bridge lengths of 4 m, 5 m, 6 m, and 7 m. It was found that for each situation, there are various possibilities of bridges, with variations in height and angles of the bridge, as well as different bars sizes. The results showed that taller bridges may be more efficient; however, this would complicate practical crossing. Therefore, it is necessary to limit the height, and the optimal point found in this research was a bridge height-to-length ratio of 0.30. Nevertheless, it is still possible to adapt the bridge access to smooth the passage, requiring further in-depth studies.
Downloads
References
Abad, Carla Torres. (2021). Eficiencia del puente autoportante de Leonardo. Técnica Industrial, 328, 30-37.
ABNT (Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas). (2022). NBR 7190 – Projeto de estruturas de madeira. Parte 1: Critérios de dimensionamento. Rio de Janeiro: ABNT.
Engenho E Arte. (2020). A ponte de emergência para a outra margem de Leonardo Da Vinci. Retrieved from:https://www.engenhoearte.info/post/a-ponte-de-emerg%C3%AAncia-para-a-outra-margem-de-leonardo-da-vinci.
Hibbeler, R. C. (2009). Resistencia dos materiais. 7.ed. Sao Paulo: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hipátia Engenharia.(2022). Ponte de Leonardo da Vinci (Self-Supporting Bridge). Retrieved from: http://www.hipatiaengenharia.com.br/2022/08/ponte-de-leonardo-da-vinci.html, 2022.
Lima, G. F. A., Perassi, R., & Triska, R. (2017). O design de Leonardo da Vinci do ponto de vista filosófico e científico. Colóquio Internacional de Design.
Morumbi Sul. (2021). Construindo pontes com Da Vinci. Retrieved from: https://morumbisul.com.br/construindo-pontes-com-da-vinci/.
Na Engenharia!. (2022). A Incrível Ponte Projetada por Leonardo Da Vinci. Retrieved from: http://naengenhariablog.blogspot.com/2017/01/a-incrivel-ponte-projetada-por-leonardo.html.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Ciência e Natura
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
