Bridge Over Water - Amazing! - United Bimmer Community

**RealBmw 02** · 05-11-2006, 07:17 PM

Water Bridge Over A River!!!

"Even after you see it it's still hard to believe. Water Bridge in Germany, what a feat."

This thing took six years, 500 million Euros (that's $631,950,000), and is 918 meters long..... must have taken some crazy engineering.

It is a channel bridge over the River Elbe and joins the former East and West Germany, as part of the unification project.

It is located in the city of Mardeburg, near Berlin. The photo was taken on the inauguration day.

***
To those who appreciate engineering projects, here's a puzzle for you armchair engineers and physicists.? Did that bridge have to be designed to withstand the additional weight of ship and barge traffic, or just the weight of the water?

**Longhairedhippy** · 05-11-2006, 07:56 PM

If my thinking is correct, the weight of the ships should be displaced along the entire channel by the water, so it is not wholly borne by the bridge.

**CAPiTUL** · 05-11-2006, 08:02 PM

I've seen that thing before. There were questions about its veracity but it is authentic. I wonder why Discovery Channel hasn't done a piece on it yet?

Having said that, it may be a waste of resources if it doesn't have any significant function other than to look purdy. That'll be a bitch to upkeep; I would be surprised if the tourism revenue would be enough to fund its maintenence.

**Chris** · 05-11-2006, 08:09 PM

^^^^^ it's probably a toll thing, the boats have to pay to use the channel as a whole and from what i gather, the chanell is supposed to be rediculously large from national travel. so the toll from each boat would fund this.....

**SHAHAB323IS** · 05-11-2006, 08:54 PM

sweet

witeshark · 05-11-2006, 09:05 PM

Great question RealBMW02 - The people are additional, but as Longhairedhippy said, the barges and boats are offset by the water they displace. As long as the water level is kept the same. Great bridge!

**mullethunter3** · 05-11-2006, 09:25 PM

i agree with witeshark,
the boyancy force from the water should counteract the force of the mass due to gravity, that is, if there is enough water.
in short, Boyancy is a function of the amount of water and the counteracting force is a function of gravity and mass

So:
B(w) is proportional to F(g)

And, if B(w)=F(g), the bridge would not have to support anything but the water.

Am I right Dough?

**CAPiTUL** · 05-11-2006, 09:29 PM

anybody in here a civil/structural engineer?

**mullethunter3** · 05-11-2006, 09:31 PM

i'm studying to be an architectural engineer, ArchE for short

**Rooz** · 05-11-2006, 09:38 PM

that's pretty amazing

**CAPiTUL** · 05-11-2006, 09:48 PM

lol. i figured as much.

**mullethunter3** · 05-11-2006, 09:52 PM

it's physics.

^^i find myself saying that more and more. everything is related to physcis and it kind of pisses me off.

**doughboyea** · 05-11-2006, 10:04 PM

Civil Engineer... still in school.... damnit.. but yea...

My view with out really reading what others have said....

The water itself weighs in at ~ 62.4lbs cubic. The boats traveling disperse an X amount due to it's own mass in the water. Kinda like u sitting in a full bath tub. The water expelled is your mass in water. So, is the tub really holding ur weight? No, it's holding the mass that would've been there had you not flopped in.

With these odd bridges, what you have is a maxiumum allowable water elevation within each segment of the bridge. Assuming that that level of water is not exceded, the bridge is sound, of course factoring in a Factor of Safety. I would say that the maximum level would be the height of the retaining walls on either side not that they should ever allow the water to reach that height (much like the bath tub). So when the boats travel through you could say that the bridge is holding up the boats and the water, but in reality, it's holding the same weight really as the water below maximum elevation... but you know what I could be so wrong on that one only because, I've never had a chance to design a bridge.

AH.... too much engineering for today... concrete and this... my mind is exploding!

Dough

**CAPiTUL** · 05-11-2006, 10:29 PM

Good money in engineering. That's what I SHOULD've done. Always was attracted to the field. Steared away, though, as I hated math ever since one high school teacher. We had an oceanography teacher teaching us algebra. She told us to copy the answers down when she went over them. We didn't learn ANYTHING! So, we got to Algebra 2 and BAM! Failed. It was a catch up game ever since then. I learned NOTHING in H.S. as far as math is concerned. In college, I finally picked up the slack and performed well in Calc, etc. But, I guess that set the tone. I'd love to go back and do something like that, but I don't think it would be a wise investment at this point, as it would take a minimum of three years, I'm guessing. Better off getting a Masters, I think. . . . I digress. . . .

**doughboyea** · 05-11-2006, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CAPiTUL

I've seen that thing before. There were questions about its veracity but it is authentic. I wonder why Discovery Channel hasn't done a piece on it yet?

Because this was more impressive:

^^random pics i found through google.

What it is, is a rotating canal that has the mass of one boat in the top with a balanced amount in the opposing end. It would rotate around delieving the upper boat to the lower elevation...
Go here for more details:
Falkirk Wheel

Dough