The Strait of Messina Bridge - The longest suspension Bridge in the world (3300m)

[Suburbanist]

The Messina bridge will be a much wider bridge with 2 high-speed rail tracks and 6 road lanes.

[Spearman]

Originally Posted by Suburbanist

The Messina bridge will be a much wider bridge with 2 high-speed rail tracks and 6 road lanes.

Look at this video at 2:55, you can see the width is about the same. It seems the length demands a certain width to avoid flutter.

[Peloso]

Originally Posted by Spearman

I can't speak for the commercial aspect of this, but I can say that a Norwegian govnt appointed study group concluded a 3700m suspension span crossing Sognefjorden was very much possible if the political will to foot the bill was present (and it sort of is - the stated goal is to complete this crossing sometime before 2025, though they may end up using a boring floating bridge rather than an awesome suspension bridge ).

Anyway Messina has more seismic activity ofc, but the span is shorter, so there is no doubt in my mind that materials and technology to build it exists.

Not only you don't have earthquakes up there in Norway - what counts the most you don't have political buffoons, mafia, "my bridge is longer than your bridge" macaroni types, etc. But even so, In the video you posted I can only see 2x2 lanes and no railway lines. I googled for "Sognefjorden bridge" and all I could find was a feasability (sic) study, here: http://www.vegvesen.no/_attachment/274047/binary/485789
very much sketched up, doesn't clear up what kind of evaluation they did. So it doesn't seem to add proof that a similar bridge could be pulled off. Could you post links to further relevant data, Spearman?

[Spearman]

Originally Posted by Peloso

Not only you don't have earthquakes up there in Norway - what counts the most you don't have political buffoons, mafia, "my bridge is longer than your bridge" macaroni types, etc. But even so, In the video you posted I can only see 2x2 lanes and no railway lines. I googled for "Sognefjorden bridge" and all I could find was a feasability (sic) study, here: http://www.vegvesen.no/_attachment/274047/binary/485789
very much sketched up, doesn't clear up what kind of evaluation they did. So it doesn't seem to add proof that a similar bridge could be pulled off. Could you post links to further relevant data, Spearman?

You're right, it will only carry four lanes of cars, but obviously; once you can build one lane, you can theoretically build another - on new pylons if need be - it then becomes a question of money. As for documentation; I don't think further specifics are public now, at least I wasn't able to find it. They have repeatedly stated in the media that a suspension bridge is possible, and that whether or not to build it is down to political will, not technology. I'll grant you that they do seem more keen on the float bridge options, so it's possible they think a float bridge would be cheaper. I don't have any more, sorry. Either way, it won't happen for many years yet. But I still don't understand why you would question the technical feasibility of the Messina bridge when so many engineers seem to think it can be done. I certainly understand that it's a question of money (as it always is, ofc), but (and no, I haven't read the entire thread yet) are there specific reasons why you think it's technically impossible?

[Peloso]

Originally Posted by Spearman

You're right, it will only carry four lanes of cars, but obviously; once you can build one lane, you can theoretically build another - on new pylons if need be - it then becomes a question of money. As for documentation; I don't think further specifics are public now, at least I wasn't able to find it. They have repeatedly stated in the media that a suspension bridge is possible, and that whether or not to build it is down to political will, not technology. I'll grant you that they do seem more keen on the float bridge options, so it's possible they think a float bridge would be cheaper. I don't have any more, sorry. Either way, it won't happen for many years yet. But I still don't understand why you would question the technical feasibility of the Messina bridge when so many engineers seem to think it can be done. I certainly understand that it's a question of money (as it always is, ofc), but (and no, I haven't read the entire thread yet) are there specific reasons why you think it's technically impossible?

Well I tend to disagree about the additional lanes (and railway lines). I'm no engineer, but it seems to me that by doubling the lanes you'd more than double the loads involved, and such an increment would have to be compensated by modifying all of the structure, and elevating the pylons. But even then, lines of tension cannot be exactly forecast when earthquakes are in the equation. If really the additional weight did not make a difference, why did they decide to erase the railway part from the final project of the Akashi kaikyo? Me too I'm convinced a floating bridge (possibly submerged to avoid spoiling the landscape of the Straits) will be the option of choice, if and when they will actually connect Sicily to mainland. I don't understand your excitement for a gigantic suspended bridge on the Sognefjord, maybe it's a matter of taste, but really, I believe history on the Sicilian coast lends itself less to an abrupt change of panorama. As to the feasibility of the Straits of Messina bridge, numerous experts and professors from different Italian universities have pointed out the risks involved in building a bridge according to the official (shady and sketchy) "blueprint". You ask, why do I think it's impossible. For starters, in today's Italy, with the current state of economy and lack of control over public money spending (and it will stay so for long) this would be unpractical and risky even if it was by an order of magnitude (or, make that two orders) less daring. The bridge would be hard to build even in a country like Japan, where the standards for building such megaprojects are highest. Besides, such a bridge would be an absolute first for the world, exceeding existing ones by a lot, so in my mind your question should be reversed... "what makes you think that this is technically possible"? After all, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, as they say. Of course the official, vague, "project draft" is no such proof. Engineers may say that it's possible because they were told to say so. Where's the paper? The data? The technical evaluation with projected loads and so on? We never saw them and never will, if I had to bet.

[Suspensionstayed]

Originally Posted by Peloso

Well I tend to disagree about the additional lanes (and railway lines). I'm no engineer, but it seems to me that by doubling the lanes you'd more than double the loads involved, and such an increment would have to be compensated by modifying all of the structure, and elevating the pylons. But even then, lines of tension cannot be exactly forecast when earthquakes are in the equation. If really the additional weight did not make a difference, why did they decide to erase the railway part from the final project of the Akashi kaikyo? Me too I'm convinced a floating bridge (possibly submerged to avoid spoiling the landscape of the Straits) will be the option of choice, if and when they will actually connect Sicily to mainland. I don't understand your excitement for a gigantic suspended bridge on the Sognefjord, maybe it's a matter of taste, but really, I believe history on the Sicilian coast lends itself less to an abrupt change of panorama. As to the feasibility of the Straits of Messina bridge, numerous experts and professors from different Italian universities have pointed out the risks involved in building a bridge according to the official (shady and sketchy) "blueprint". You ask, why do I think it's impossible. For starters, in today's Italy, with the current state of economy and lack of control over public money spending (and it will stay so for long) this would be unpractical and risky even if it was by an order of magnitude (or, make that two orders) less daring. The bridge would be hard to build even in a country like Japan, where the standards for building such megaprojects are highest. Besides, such a bridge would be an absolute first for the world, exceeding existing ones by a lot, so in my mind your question should be reversed... "what makes you think that this is technically possible"? After all, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, as they say. Of course the official, vague, "project draft" is no such proof. Engineers may say that it's possible because they were told to say so. Where's the paper? The data? The technical evaluation with projected loads and so on? We never saw them and never will, if I had to bet.

The rail portion of the Akashi Kaikyo was eliminated due to the cost. Note though the 46 foot deep stiffening truss that can easily accommodate rail lines in the future. The Akashi Kaikyo's counterpart on the same route - the Onaruto Bridge actually has the "pads" for the rail lines on its lower cords, thus as of 1985 the plan for a train was real. As much as I'm into the Akashi Kaikyo Bridge I've yet to see official blue prints yet the bridge exists. As for the Strait of Messian Bridge… consultancy fees, compensation for contracts never realized, and, ironically, cost-analysis have swallowed up nearly $977 million without a girder planted for the Strait of Messina project. So you're telling us that despite nearly a billion being spent already that this bridge's possibility is still based on hunches? Considering the way corporations are with their intellectual property I'm sure COWI doesn't want those plans available to the general public.

I don’t consider the Strait of Messina Bridge an extraordinary bridge. One only has to see what has been done with bridges in the past and it becomes a great possibility that the Strait of Messina Bridge can be built. A 3,300 meter / 10,827 feet mainspan is still well within the capability of high strength steel to make cables to support the bridge.

One thing to keep in mind with the Strait of Messina Bridge is that while it may have a mainspan that is 40% longer than the Akashi Kaikyo, its overall suspended length is well shorter than the Akashi Kaikyo, thus the towers can handle the downward thrust of the deck's weight. Sure the towers are considerably taller. They're still only half the height of the Burj Khalifa. The beautiful part of the Messina Bridge is that they don’t have to go into the water. If you were to add what lies below water of the Akashi Kaikyo Bridge to what is above water, then the whole tower / foundation is nearly as high as those towers proposed on the Messina Bridge. The Messina Bridge will have dual cables on each side. In New York City there are two suspension bridges that have dual cables. One bridge the George Washington has 14 lanes and two pedestrain /bicycle paths. It's mainspan is 3,500 feet. The Verrazano Narrows has 12 lanes of traffic within its mainspan of 4,200. Both have 36 inch cables. I have no doubt that the Strait of Messina Bridge can carry its 4 lanes and two rail lines as its cables will be 44 inches and made of much stronger wire. Those two New York City bridges were built back in the 1930s and 1960s. We come a long ways since. In South Korea there is Yi Sun-sin bridge which is soon to open. It has a mainspan of 5,069 feet with a streamlined box girder only 10 feet deep. This gives it a deck depth to span ratio of 1:507. This is incredibly slender. It has four lanes with a gap separating the opposing lanes. The Strait of Messina will have a much wider deck with two gaps, and it appears it will be considerably thicker (deeper). I have no doubts a bridge like the Strait of Messina can be built. I realize it probably won't happen, which is good; Italy doesn't deserve it. It will probably be somewhere in Asia that will exceed the Akashi Kaikyo. Oh, and the Akashi Kaikyo survived an earthquake with its epicenter practically under the bridge a few kilometers away. As a result of the earthquake, the mainspan became 3 feet longer when an unknown fault running between the towers opened up. Sure the deck wasn’t in place yet as only the towers, main cables, and a some suspenders where hung, but considering all the thermal expansion the deck experiences throughout the course of the year, the expansion joints are easily capable of handling a few feet of stretching.

[Peloso]

Originally Posted by Suspensionstayed

The rail portion of the Akashi Kaikyo was eliminated due to the cost. Note though the 46 foot deep stiffening truss that can easily accommodate rail lines in the future. The Akashi Kaikyo's counterpart on the same route - the Onaruto Bridge actually has the "pads" for the rail lines on its lower cords, thus as of 1985 the plan for a train was real.

The plan was real. The train is not.

Originally Posted by Suspensionstayed

As much as I'm into the Akashi Kaikyo Bridge I've yet to see official blue prints yet the bridge exists.

Yes, without rails.

Originally Posted by Suspensionstayed

As for the Strait of Messian Bridge… consultancy fees, compensation for contracts never realized, and, ironically, cost-analysis have swallowed up nearly $977 million without a girder planted for the Strait of Messina project. So you're telling us that despite nearly a billion being spent already that this bridge's possibility is still based on hunches?

Even more so. I see you don't know much about Italian politics and how and why was the penalty system arranged this way. In fact, all of this enterprise was put up in order to feed mafia and politicians.

Originally Posted by Suspensionstayed

Considering the way corporations are with their intellectual property I'm sure COWI doesn't want those plans available to the general public.

I don’t consider the Strait of Messina Bridge an extraordinary bridge. One only has to see what has been done with bridges in the past and it becomes a great possibility that the Strait of Messina Bridge can be built. A 3,300 meter / 10,827 feet mainspan is still well within the capability of high strength steel to make cables to support the bridge.

What do you base this confidence on? What data are you relying on?

Originally Posted by Suspensionstayed

One thing to keep in mind with the Strait of Messina Bridge is that while it may have a mainspan that is 40% longer than the Akashi Kaikyo,

err... no. Check your facts. It's 3300 meters against 1991.

Originally Posted by Suspensionstayed

its overall suspended length is well shorter than the Akashi Kaikyo,

Err... guess what, the hard part is the main span, not the secondary ones.

Originally Posted by Suspensionstayed

thus the towers can handle the downward thrust of the deck's weight. Sure the towers are considerably taller. They're still only half the height (bla bla) I have no doubts a bridge like the Strait of Messina can be built. I realize it probably won't happen, which is good;

Isn't concision a great gift?

[Suspensionstayed]

Originally Posted by Peloso

The plan was real. The train is not. Yes, without rails. Even more so. I see you don't know much about Italian politics and how and why was the penalty system arranged this way. In fact, all of this enterprise was put up in order to feed mafia and politicians.What do you base this confidence on? What data are you relying on?err... no. Check your facts. It's 3300 meters against 1991.Err... guess what, the hard part is the main span, not the secondary ones. Isn't concision a great gift?

The only thing you have me on is my mistake with the 40%. The more accurate statement would have been the Akashi mainspan is 60% that of the Messina Bridge.
I should have added…

Increases in mainspan size along the level of that in the Messina over the Akashi are not unprecedented in history.

Akashi Kaikyo / Messina - 67% increase (now going on 24 years gap in construction starts).

Ambassador / George Washington - 89% increase (less than one year gap in construction starts).

Ambassador / Golden Gate Bridge – 127% increase (six years between construction starts).

As for the rest... you do very little in shooting down my argument which is based on what has been done before and what exists today, and applying it to what can be done. Sure the mainspan is the more difficult part, but only as far as aerodynamics. I've given ample examples to show that it can be done. Considering how wide the deck is it would appear that flutter can be kept in check.

As for not knowing about Italian politics… it’s quite obvious how screwed up your system is when nearly one billion dollars are spent and all you have to show for it is a relocated rail line for a kilometer. I can only imagine how it must be to live in a system like that. It is no wonder that there is no infrastructure on either side of the bridge site.

Also obvious is your disdain for bridges, thus your negativity towards this project. You even have gone so far to question another’s favorability of another project with “I don't understand your excitement for a gigantic suspended bridge on the Sognefjord”. Hey, people love bridges. We have evolved further than to having to burrow underground in tunnels.

Sure concision can be a great gift, only when you know how to use it. Most times it pays to look at the big picture. Perhaps that's something that is lacking in Italy.

[Spearman]

Originally Posted by Peloso

Me too I'm convinced a floating bridge (possibly submerged to avoid spoiling the landscape of the Straits) will be the option of choice, if and when they will actually connect Sicily to mainland. I don't understand your excitement for a gigantic suspended bridge on the Sognefjord, maybe it's a matter of taste, but really, I believe history on the Sicilian coast lends itself less to an abrupt change of panorama.

I have heard people say things to this effect before, and I can for the life of me not understand where they are coming from. As for the fjords; they are dramatic, majestic and awesome and that is exactly the qualities a great suspension bridge brings. If you like one, I don't understand why you wouldn't like the other. It would enhance, not detract. But in all honesty, Sognefjorden doesn't have the strong currents of the Messina Straits, so I doubt a suspension bridge will happen (though I'm still hoping ofc), but the crossing will happen and get it's own thread sometime in the future. I just brought it up to show that it's not just Italian engineers who believe a span like this is possible.

As for the straits, they are also pretty, and yes, the bridge will dominate the view. But (and I know somebody will hate me for saying this) the landscape isn't that special either. A can't feel but that at worst a bridge would do for the Straits what the Golden Gate does for the bay of SF. In fact; if they came up with a way of spending all that money without giving any kind of visuals back (how exciting is it really to drive inside a tunnel...) I'd feel really cheated, and so should you.

So from an aesthetic viewpoint I take the same view on both crossings: go awesome or not at all!

As for technical feasibility; check out this. It is a study done on the Sunda Bridge in Indonesia. Just to give you the digest; he says that the limiting factor on suspension spans is not cable strength and certainly not the strenght of the pylons (you can always increase pylon thickness), but the fight to avoid flutter and twisting on the bridge deck. He identifies three generations of accomplishing this:
1. Stiffening by a lattice girder truss underneath (like the Akashi Kaiko). The maximum for this design is about 2000 m.
2. Aerodynamic closed box (like the Humber or the Storebelt). Also maxes out at about 2000 m, but with the advantage of being lighter and with a smaller surface area exposed to the elements.
3. Several aerodynamic closed boxes side-by-side allowing air to circulate between them. This is the design chosen for the Messina bridge, and is believed to have a limit of about 5000 m.

[brick84]

by italian thread

Originally Posted by TRINACRIA FELIX

Ecco il fiore all'occhiello di Mr. Brown che ha fatto impazzire tanti espertoni nostrani!

[joseph1951]

Originally Posted by Suspensionstayed

....

1-
As for the Strait of Messian Bridge… consultancy fees, compensation for contracts never realized, and, ironically, cost-analysis have swallowed up nearly $977 million (???) without a girder planted for the Strait of Messina project. So you're telling us that despite nearly a billion being spent already that this bridge's possibility is still based on hunches? Considering the way corporations are with their intellectual property I'm sure COWI doesn't want those plans available to the general public. .

The project is paid by the Italian state. Therefore the intellectual property of the project belongs to the Italian State, and precisely to the Italian Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport (Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti, or MIT) .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministr...ansport_(Italy)

The Strait of Messina Spa Company is a "private" company having Italian State as a sole shareholder. The other "private companies" forming the consortium are: Anas Spa, RFI SpA, which are all italian state-owned private companies.

After 50-60 years of "rumours of private companies which have shown a timid interest in this venture" there are no private investors....yet.

[brick84]

Originally Posted by joseph1951

[/B]After 50-60 years of "rumours of private companies which have shown a timid interest in this venture" there are no private investors....yet.

"After 50-60 years of stupid ideology" now is time di start with works.