You are on page 1of 5

Paper:

.-..
... '

P~per

~t al

;:,rn1u1

:1,II

j.

Three-hinge analysis of masonry arches


l

F. W. Smith, BSc, CEng, MICE

Wolfson Bridg~ Research Unit, University of Dundee

'~,

W. J~ Hal'Vjey, BSc, PhD, CEng, MICE


Wolfson Bridgb Research Unit, University of Dundee

~f
Professor }\.E.
Vardy, BSc, PhD, CEng, MICE, MASCE
Wolfson Bridge Research Unit, University of Dundee

~lf

synopsis

Brief reviews,~ of the behaviour of masonry arch bridges and of


popular methods of analysis highlight the need for a simple,
practical and{ysis of arches under working loads. A
three-hinge fhodel is proposed and is shown to lead to the
same solutio~ as four-hinge mechanism analyses when the
structure ap)Jroaches ultimate load. The three-hinge method is
extended to ~nable failures by local crushing of the masonry
to be simula~ed. It is also shown to permit realistic allowances
made for movements of abutments.

r:

Introduction J
Since 1676 1, there have been attempts to determine how arches support
the loads they[~re called on to carry. In the case of masonry arch bridges,
the arch ring rr\ay be greatly stiffened by spandrel walls and by fill between
II
the pavement surface and the arch. Nevertheless, these features are by no
means decisivJin poorly maintained structures, and engineers usually base
judgments onjlthe capacity of the arch .alone (or on the arch and known
fill material)
In many areas of structural destgn, attention is focused primarily on the
behaviour of ~!structure at ultimate load. Serviceability criteria are evaluated
1
independentlYt and are assumed to have no direct bearing on the safety of
the structure,ieven when they lead to more onerous requirements. With
masonry consthiction, however, and with old masonry bridges in particular,
this may not ge a sound approach. Certainly, there is a need to know the
ultimate cap~~ity of a structure, but this may be strongly influenced by
behaviour ~t Jruch smaller loads. Alexander & Thompson2 , for example,
drew attention to the consequences of the continual opening and closing
'"
.
of crack.
s between
a d'Jacent voussoirs. In effect,
the most pressing need
may be for a fuethod of defining and measuring serviceability limits rather
11
than ultimatel:limits.

ll:

~noadsu

..

Masonry arch behaviour


.,
,
There is ample evidence that masonry arches tend to deform when centring
is removed 34 and that three hinges can form under the action of deid
t load
.,
alone (Fig l(a)). Sometimes this is due to shortening of the arch itself under
compression, especially in the case of very flat arches. At other tifues; it
5
may be due to abutment spread at the spr_ingings W?atever th~:tcau}e,
the arch is likely to adopt a statlcally-determmate three-hmge form m whtch
the locations of the hinges are the principal unknowns ..Figs l(b) ahd l(c)
illustrate two possible configurations for an arch carrying dead lo~d and
a concentrated live load. Different lines of thrust are obtained, actording
to the load position. The hinges are exaggerated for clarity. One ~r both
outer hinges are within the arch itself, and regions of the arch beyor/d these
1
1
points are effectively rigid.
The positions of the hinges can also be influenced by the magnilude of
the live l_oad. With successively increasin~ loads, ~inge C in Fig 7:moves
progressively further to the left, and the lme of action of the thruSf at the
right-hand springing moves upwards. Eventually, the thrust linejreaches
the extrados and a fourth hinge is formed. At this stage, the st~ucture
becomes a mechanism, and collapse is inevitable in the absence of ~xteinal
changes.
It .:
Figs I and 2 illustrate the problem of quantifying serviceability limits
for masonry arches. Real bridges experience moving traffic load~ a~d a
wide range of load magnitudes. The hinge positions vary with time,
sometimes quite rapidly.

{'

Masonry arch analysis

::

Early analysis by Castigliano6 and others were based on elastic p;rnciples.


The complete voussoir arch was assumed to act as an elastic rib with fixed

ends. As loads were applied, tension developed in certain areas. THe crosssections at these locations were reduced to eliminate the cracked arhs, and
successive analyses were obtained, approaching a final soluti~b in an

rfac;e
I

(b) One hinge displaced

'

et al
300

(a)

500

i!

.t

~{

/:1'

i:

!/

.t

(c)

(d)

Fig 2. Influence of applied load magnitude on hinge positions

iterative Lanner. The necessary calculations must have been tedious, but
the meth~d is potentially sound in principle, provided that proper account
is takenilof abutment movements (to which it is highly sensitive). Its
disadvantage today lies in the difficulty of incorporating interactions with
the fill. Hughes' has. developed a microcomputer-based analysis, treating
the fillfs ail elastic medium. -

.
in use today are
The Jlost
popular methods of analysis
#
.
-the MEXE method
-the m~chanism method
-finite1~Iemeni methods ,, "'
The K.fEXE method is based on Pippard's8 use of Castigliano's
theorenl~. It has a sound theoretical basis, but it is unduly sensitive to
parame~ers whose values cannot be determined accurately in many cases,
especiaiiy with existing structures.
The fuechanism method, .revived by Heyman\ is elegant and easily
underst'i>od. The method enables the locations of the four hinges shown
in Fig 2(d) to be determined and gives the load at which these will be formed.
Heyma~ did not claim that the method would provide an accurate prediction
of the failure load, although this would naturally be possible if all the
necessJ\-y parameters were known with sufficient accuracy. Instead, he
propos~d that the safe load should be deemed to be the ultimate load for
an arcij of the same shape, but half the thickness. Harvey 9 proposed an
alternalive interpretation of the same analysis, i.e. determining the minimum
thickn~ss of arch rlng capable of supporting the known (factored) applied
1

~~~

'

'

With finite element methods, account is taken of strains as well as stresses


and
more information is obtained than is possible with mechanism
anal;Js. Crisfield10 has included both geometric and elastic non-linearities
in his ihodel, and he can m!lke quite accurate predictions of bridge collapse
loads ~~hen appropriate-~material characteristics are known. The main
disad~antages of such techniques are the large demand on computing
resoui~es and the difficulty
in obtaining and inputting adequate data about
'
the g~ometry and the material properties. Although the speed and the
capacity of readily available computers are increasing rapidly, these remain
a major limitation for engineers wishing to use extensive finite element
progt~ms for interactive design ...
Th~ obvious gap in 'the available theoretical methods is for a simple
meth~d of simulating the behaviour of arches in the three-hinge state that
predJminates for most of their working lives. It is the purpose of this paper
to prfsent such a method.

s8

,.

'

',

'

Thr~~e-hinge. analysis

''

'

'

In it~- simplest form, the proposed method of analysis closely resembles


the J\echanism analysis described by Heyman4 :Consider the voussoir arch
in Fi~ 3(a) under the action of dead load and a single live load. The analysis
belri~s by guessing the locations of the three hinges - typically, at the

intrados at the springings and at the extrados between the crbwn''and the
load, but anywhere in principle. The vertical and horizonta!Jomponents
of the thrust at any hinge can be determined by static equilibrium. For
example, by taking moments about each of the hinges A and ~in Fig 3(a),
:!
the components at C are found to satisfy

:r

~{v(x-x~)}+

:::{h(y-yA)}- V,(x,-xA)-H,({-;yA)=O

~{v(x-x8 )}+ :::{h(y-y8 ) } -

il .... (I)

V(x -x8 )-H(y -y 8 )=0

' '

' :1' . . . . (2)

do~nwards)

in which hand v denote the horizontal (L-+ R) and vertica;


components of all forces acting on the arch ring. These ar imposed by
the fill and are determined from the known live loading i~ the manner
described by Harvey5 Briefly, they are due to (i) the weight of the fill,
(ii) forces arising from live loads, suitably distributed by the! fill, and (iii)
active, passive or intermediate pressure forces arising froml:mov,ement of
the ring. The predicted load distribution is displayed in Fig 3 and in
subsequent figures by vectors on the arch extrados.
j
,;
Knowing the magnitude and direction of the thrust at each hinge, the
magnitude and the line of action of the thrust can be det~~miried at any
other location around the ring. This enables a so-called 'li~~ of. thrust' to
be drawn for the whole ring, giving results such as those i~ Figs 3(b) and
3(c). In the former case, the line of thrust strays outside tile ring, and so
the solution is incorrect. Alternative solutions must be soughl with different
(assumed) hinge positions until a result such as Fig 3(c) i! obtained.
~ven when ~n acceptable solution has be~n o_btained,;~it may no~ be
umque. Sometimes, there are several combmatwns of assumed hmge
positions for which a static solution is possible, particular!* in the case of
shallow arches. In such cases, as may be inferred from Fig 3(c), hinge C
in the real structure is likely to be difficult to locate precisel1. Indeed, there
may be many voussoirs showing signs of rotation. Any efror introduced
1
by choosing a particular position will be negligible becausJ th~ choice has
so little influence on the assumed position of the line of th~ust. In the
authors' computer program, the case yielding the minimum horirontal thrust

;:,:,~:~;:'"''"" ;, '""'"' th: coc<~poo"- to <ho mlo;m~~\n

'f' " '"'"'

Example 1: Torksey Bridge


,
:;
As part of a series of full-scale tests organised by the UK nan sport & Road
Research Laboratory", a low-rise segmental arch bridg~ at Torksey in
Lincolnshire was loaded to destruction. The bridge over! drainage canal
had a span of 4880mm and a rise of ll40mm and noskb~. The 343mmthick arch ring, comprising three rings of brick, was in reas3nable condition,
>
but the spandrels had separated from the arch barrel. ~he road surface
was level, and the depth of fill above the crown was 23~f~~- Inspection

Paper: Smith! et al
~t

(b) Invalid hinge positions

11
-11-

r,1!;

II

I[

(c) Possitlle hinge positions

3. LinJ of thrust in the arch ring


'f

reveale~

after collale
some additional backing (haunching) near the
springings.ii
A 750mm-wide line load was applied at a single quarter point across
the roadwa~ (between the spandrels) by means of hydraulic jacks acting
on steel rods anchored in the. bed of the canal. Deflections and cracking
at successive load increments
until failure occurred
at
a load
were record~d
-lh '
.
'
.: . " '
of 140kN!J:h width across the roadway. Only the latter parameter can be
compared directly with the proposed analysis.
Fig 4 shors computer simulations at successively increased loads, based
on the abo~e analysis. With dead load only (Fig 4(a)), the hinges are at
the crown ~hd the springings. At a relatively small load of lOkN/m width
(Fig 4(b )), t'he central hinge has moved towards the load, thus highlighting
the concerl expressed by Alexander & Thompson 2 about the successive
opening an'U closing of joints between adjacent voussoirs. At a load of
32 kN/m width (noi shown), the hinge has reached the load point, and this
configurati~n obtains until the right-hand hinge begins t~ move along the
' the springing at loads in excess of about 40 kN/m width.
arch, away)from
As the loa~;increases, the hinge moves successively further to the left and
the line of thrust at the right-hand springing moves away from the intrados
'

\7"''

'1

~wulru. Fig 4() how typkol ~mpk duri"' thi p<riod

J '
When the load is increased further, the line of thrust at the right"hand
springing eventually reaches the extrados. At this stage, a fo~rth hinge
forms, the arch ring becomes a mechanism, and collapse must follow. In
this particular example, the formation of the fourth hinge o'tcurs at a
predicted load of 140kN/m width which is in agreementJwith the
experimentally measured collapse load.
!
Since the underlying methods of analysis are identical, the tftree~hinge
and four-hinge (mechanism) analyses predict exactly the same ~ond,itions
at failure. The advantage of the three-hinge method is that il provides
information about the behaviour of the structure prior to fail~re, Both
methods depend on the assumed load distribution around the.textrados,
and the three-hinge predictions prior to failure also depend on the
assumption of minimum thrust at the springings. Nevertheless, t~e aii'alyses
are approximately valid and, at the very least, provide excellent ~ualitative
information. By inspection, the behaviour at low loads differsJmarkedly
from that at high loads.
~~
,
. Two featur~s of t_he presentation o~ Fig 4 merit com~e~t. wrstly,_ the
!me of thrust IS depicted as a double !me - although this 1s n0t obviOus
at low loads. This is a consequence of extending the analysis tJ allow for
local crushing of the masonry. The necessary details are explaihed :in the

1'

1 '.
I

'I

;f
I

(a)

(b) 10 k/Nm width

140

li
I
:t

i'
,,

(c) 80k/N.\; width

:II

Fig 4. Prefticted behaviour of Torksey Bridge


ill

'

(d) 140 k/Nm width

'I'

PapenlhI' Smith et al
I!

!i

It

~~----]\

~I
'II

;[

------=

l1

(a} lniinite stress

I'
I,I

Example 2: Preston-upon-the- Weald Moors Bridge


1
Another of the full-scale tests organised by TRRL 11 was at Preston-uponthe-Weald Moors Bridge in Shropshire. This semi-elliptical!:fanal bridge
with a skew of 17 was built around 1834 and had a span of 4950mm and
a rise of 1636mm. The 360mm-thick sandstone arch ring apbeared to be
in reasonable condition, and there was no separation from the ~rick,spandrel
walls. The road surface was 375 mm above the crown and the fill was mainly
granular. Haunching consisting of 'large coursed sandstone blJcks; possibly
cemented together' was present behind the arch above the sp~~-~ngings, thus
,, .
effectively raising the height of the springings.
A 750mm-wide line load was applied across the roadway, Pilrallel to the
springings, at a span third point, the method of application being similar
to that at Torksey. As the applied load increased, significa~t horizontal
movement was detected at or near the springings. Failure eventifally occurred
at a load of 370kN/m width, separation of the arch ba~~el from the
spandrels having occurred a:t a much smaller load.
i't "
Fig 6 shows computer simulations for this case, with no all0wance being
made for skew and with granular fill over the whole arch (i.e. n~ haunching).
By inspection, the line of thrust is not contained wholly within the arch
eveh at the quite low load 9f lOOkN/m width. Indeed, for all i~ads.in excess
of about 60kN/m width, the line of thrust passes through''!he arch' ring
into the haunching. Effectively, this implies that the haunchrng
' acts as an
abutment, preventing the formation of a fourth hinge. Jt
It would be misleading to suggest that the computer simuf~tions
can be
.,
used to 'predict' the failure load in this case. The difficulty is ttiat the degree
of restraint offered by the haunching is unknown. Unddubtedly,
the
.,
haunching provides far more constraint than the granular fill assumed in
the analysis. Nonetheless, the observed horizontal moveme;yts above the
springings show that the structure could not be regarded as ~gid. All that
can fairly be concluded, therefore, is that the simulations are consistent
with th_e observat~ons.
_
_.
In this context, It must be emphasised that all known methods of analysis
are sensitive to the (unknown) properties of haunching, es~rcially where
the ring is more vertical than horizontal. The value of three-hinge
simulations such as those in Fig 6 is that they provide engineers'twith evidence
on which to base judgment. Similar results could'be obtained with a fourhinge (mechanism) analysis for all loads above about 60k~/m.,width in
this particular case, but not for loads below this value. 1~ '
A further advantage of the three-hinge approach is that. it provides
information about the position and magnitude of the thlust on each
abutment. The predicted values are subject to the same limifations as the
rest of the analysis, but they are the best estimates available for designing
!
or assessing the abutment requirements.

'I

f
'r,

-::-----r---=x_----~

1_'[-----

:1.

(b) 1jinite stress

Fig 5. In]luence of material strength on the zone of thrust


:II

foliowin~

section. Secondly, the lines of thrust are much more curved at


low load~ than at high loads. In case (a), the curvature is due to the dead
load of the arch and the fill alone. As successively greater live load is applied,
0 h e thrusf lines tend to straighten and the magnitude of the thrust increases.

.-

~I

Influence of matenal strength


In the sidtple line of thrust approach, no account is taken of the strength
of the rrl~sonry. As a consequence, hinges are assumed to form exactly
at the exlrados or at the intrados of the arch ring (Fig 5(a)). In practice,
however,)~ this is not possible because the material cannot transmit infinite
stresses. 'II
A moFe realistic representation of a hinge is as a region of masonry at
the crusffing stress of the voussoirs (or mortar, if present). In Fig 5(b), the
line ofthhist may be assumed to act at the mid-depth ofa region of depth
h where 'I[
. ______ _
h

=- ;F_
1 ou

....

H .:

(3)

1 denotes the local thrust and a" is the assumed crushing str~s~:
in whicnlt
This is considerable simplification of the true state of stress, but it is
much bdtter than assuming infinite stresses.
The v~lue of a" used will depend on the needs of the analyst. In most
cases, it ~}viii be sufficient to accept the characteristic values derived from
graphs in the Code of Practice for the bridge assessment BD2l/84 12, and
apply sJltable partial factors of safety.
The dbuble
lines of thrust in Fig 4 and in subsequent figures depict the
,,
t depth ofilmaterial which would be required locally to form a hinge capable
_ -' of transrhitting the local thrust. They provide a visual means of interpreting

,--...

'II
'II
II

Ji

~~
.lr

(a) 50 .k/Nm width

(b) 100 k/Nm width

11,

j[
.!

370
200

IIIi

I
I

(c) 200 k/Nm width

II

il

the behaviour of the structure under increasing load (or varying loads).
By inspection, one effect is to decrease the effective ring thickpess; :stability
exists only when both lines are contained wholly''within the ring:iThis reduces
the load at which a fourth hinge forms, causing the structure to become
a mechanism.
t.

(d) 370 k/Nm width

Fig 6. Roredicted behaviour of Preston-upon-the- Weald Moors Bridge

i.:~'""'"-~-~.,

Paper:

~'

lI

'!

::

(a) 500 l/Nm width

Fig 7.

(b) 800 k/Nm width

No ~ional behaviour at loads exceeding the true failure load

r
il

,.

'

I
II
,j;

'I

r
L

,I

[.

1,
(a) Before movement
'

(b) After movement

,[1

Fig 8. Response of a masonry arch to abutment spread

.I:

.I

(a) 40 ;k/Nm width

(b) 65 k/Nm width

11

:.II

:11

(c) Failure at 70 k/Nm width

..

:II

Fig 9. Behaviour of Torksey Bridge assuming abutment movement


I~
.
.
It is ins:tructive to continue the analysis to even greater loads, as illustrated
in Fig 7. Suppose that the haunching had been sufficiently strong to prevent
the form~tion of a fourth hinge, even at these loads, and ask the question
'w01ild t?.e structure have survived?'._ According to a simple mechanism
analysis, :ithe answer is undoubtedly 'yes', but this is difficult to believe.
The matbrial is very highly stressed, particularly close to the hinges. In
practice, j~palling of the outer surface of the voussoirs is likely to occur,
thus redJ.cing the ring thickness and rendering the arch less stable. It is
noteworthy that considerable spalling occurred at the outer hinges of the
11
Preston-~.Jpon-the-Weald Moors Bridge. Also, several observers concluded
that faiiJre occurred through crushing at the hinge under the load, not
through ~ simple mechanism. The proposed analysis helps an engineer to
. take acc~unt of this effect.
In reality, large compressive stresses
Imply the existence of large strains
.
which will induce shortening of the arch.ring. This phenomenon cannot
readily b~ taken into account in three-hinge or mechanism analyses, but
engineers%1ssessing a structure should make due allowances, especially when
the arch 1is fairly flat, as is quite often the case.
I
.
~
~
Abutme.nt spread

It is pos{ible to allow directly for the influence of abutment spread. Fig

.... -r .

., .

-1~

J'

n..,

-lie

---~'~ 'L--~--

L! _ _ _ ---...l!.o.!-- ----L!-1....

- - - L - ------1-...1

'

' ..., '

'

,'

' '"'

'

-~
(

as two rigid bars, LA and AR. If the abutments L and R moyhe apart, the
new position of the intermediate hinge must lie on the arc AI\ centred on
L and on the arc BB centred on R (Fig 8(b). These arcs ha~e a unique
inters~ction point an? so thene~ position of the ring can b~tdete.rm.ined

'i!i :_
by a ~1mple geometnc.constructiOn:
This effect has been mcorporated mto the authors: computer programs,
which allow movement of the abutments in proportion to th~~thr~st. The
iterative procedure for each increment is as follows: .
1l ':
(i) determine the line of thrust assuming no additional movement;
(ii) using the predicted thrust at the springings, evaluate the nbw positions
of the abutments and hence the new position of the interm'~diate hinge;
(iii) repeat steps (i) and (ii) as often as necessary (usually dbly once)
In practice, spreading of the abutments usually causes at :feast one of
the outer hinges to move away from the springings and into'ihe ring. To
simulate this case, it is necessary to know the rotational compbnent of the
abutment movement as well as the linear displacements. Thl~ is because
the portion of the ring beyond the outer hinge effectively acts':~ompositely
with the abutment itself. The programs assume that this portiC:h of the ring
undergoes the same linear displacement as the abutment and also rotates
.
about the springing.
'

You might also like