data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cda3d/cda3d311946c0c1b670224759316d6179e91b86b" alt=""
In a recent post, I reviewed
Bridging the Dutch Landscape, a sort of how-to-design-bridges-for-beginners produced several years ago by the design firm ipv Delft.
In 2014, ipv Delft helped prepare
a new bridge design guide for the Dutch infrastructure knowledge-sharing body, CROW. Now, this has been translated into English in abbreviated form. You can
download a free copy; I'm not sure whether any hard copies are still available.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9e7da/9e7da2c5a3d8a57f287613a9535fecc6cbad8f23" alt=""
As with
Bridging the Dutch Landscape, this is a well-illustrated volume, with plenty of diagrams and photographs as examples. The
Brief Dutch design manual is, however, a little more technical than its predecessor, more concerned with the requirements that a designer must satisfy than with the opportunities available to them.
There is a great deal of good material on spatial requirements for different types of pedestrians, and cyclists. I was interested in the contrast between this and the UK footbridge design standard,
BD29, which is something of a blunt instrument, intended for simple urban bridges and often applied in situations where it is unhelpfully restrictive.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/57500/5750089975aa4656f2d18a4a41988704952f317d" alt=""
The Dutch approach takes greater account of different users, and allows a little more flexibility in how the width of a bridge is determined and apportioned. As you might expect, there is plenty of advice on spatial requirements for cyclists, and even a mention for designing for the needs of in-line skaters! This information extends to a more coherent approach to ramp gradients, with a concept of "difficulty" which takes account of not only the gradient but also the total length of ramp, such that over a short distance, a steeper ramp may be deemed acceptable. This offers the designer the chance to interpret a given situation, rather than simply respond to hard-edged rules.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eaf5e/eaf5ea06798f01cd270e4f317b1f5961e914a488" alt=""
There are other areas, however, where the Dutch design standards are strangely onerous, such as their challenging requirements for collision loads on bridges spanning a highway, and also their parapet loadings, which are also inexplicably large. Against these can be set another example of context-sensitive specification, for the space between elements in a parapet railing. In the UK, this is normally set at a blanket gap size of 100mm, but the Dutch permit a gap as large as 500mm in some cases, only requiring tighter limits in cases where the bridge is likely to be used frequently by young children.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0c202/0c2028c79d4e46140dcc7f33e1370cea26c73210" alt=""
As with its predecessor, the book has some brief but useful information on actual costs of real footbridges, and also a handful of project examples, such as Eindhoven's Hovenring.
I can see myself referring to this design manual any time I'm designing a bridge for cyclists, or when I want to try and challenge a client to see beyond the standard rules and regulations. It's a useful reminder that a designer can apply their own judgement in response to a specific situation, and that the normal regulatory constraints are essentially arbitrary and open to debate.
1 comment:
Hello, I am trying to design a pedestrian bridge that carries motorcycles. Any advise on the collision load for a motorcycle?
Post a Comment