Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Catenary arch of finite thickness as the optimal arch shape

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Based on the analogy with the load path of a homogeneous hanging chain, catenary has been for over three centuries considered to be an ideal masonry arch’s shape. In the present research, after the thrust line theory, complete insight into the equilibrium analysis of catenary arch of finite thickness under its own weight is provided. It is concluded that, in accordance with the common criterion—the existence of only normal (axial) forces—the ideality has previously been unjustifiably attached to such an arch, since there are shear forces present as well. However, with respect to so-called Couplet-Heyman’s assumptions (unilateral rigid no-tension material), it is shown that any catenary arch is stable under its own weight.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexakis H, Makris N (2013) Minimum thickness of elliptical masonry arches. Acta Mech 224(12):2977–2991

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Alexakis H, Makris N (2015) Limit equilibrium analysis of masonry arches. Arch Appl Mech 85(9):1363–1381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bélidor BFd (1729) La science des ingénieurs dans la conduite des travaux de fortification et d’architecture civile. Paris

  • Benvenuto E (1991) An introduction to the history of structural mechanics. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bernoulli J (1690) Analysis problematis antehac propositi, de inventione lineæ descensus a corpore gravi percurrendæ uniformiter, sic ut temporibus æqualibus æquales altitudines emetiantur: & alterius cujusdam Problematis Propositio. Acta Eruditorum, 217– 219

  • Bernoulli J (1704) Meditationes, annotationes, animadversiones theol. et philos. a me concinnatae et collectae ab anno 1677-1704

  • Bossut C (1774) Recherches sur l’Èquilibre des voûtes. Historie de l’Académie Royale des Sciences 1778:534–566

    Google Scholar 

  • Cocchetti G, Colasante G, Rizzi E (2012) On the analysis of minimum thickness in circular masonry arches. Appl Mech Rev 64(5):27 pages

    Google Scholar 

  • Como M (2017) Statics of historic masonry constructions. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Coulomb CA (1773) Essai sur une application des régles des maximis & minimis à quelques problémes de statique, relativs a larquitecture. Mémoires de Mathématique et de Physique, présentés à l’Académie Royal des Sciences per divers Savans, & lûs dans ses Assemblées 1776:343–382

    Google Scholar 

  • Couplet P (1730) Seconde partie de l’examen de la poussee des voûtes. Histoire de l’Académie Royale des Sciences 1732:117–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowan HJ (1981) Some observations on the structural design of masonry arches and domes before the age of structural mechanics. Archit Sci Rev 24(4):98–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foce F (2007) Milankovitch’s Theorie der Druckkurven: good mechanics for masonry architecture. Nexus Netw J 9(2):185–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gáspár O, Sipos AA, Sajtos I (2018) Effect of stereotomy on the lower bound value of minimum thickness of semi-circular masonry arches. Int J Archit Herit 12(6):899–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory D (1697) Catenaria. Phil Trans 19:637–652

    Google Scholar 

  • Heyman J (1972) Coulombs memoir on statics: an essay in the history of civil engineering. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Heyman J (1997) The stone skeleton: structural engineering of masonry architecture. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooke R (1676) A description of helioscopes and some other instruments. John Martyn, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Huerta S (2001) Mechanics of masonry vaults: the equilibrium approach. In: Lourenço PB, Roca P (eds) Historical constructions, pp 47–69

  • Huerta S (2006) Structural design in the work of Gaudí. Archit Sci Rev 49(4):327–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huerta S (2008) The analysis of masonry architecture: a historical approach. Archit Sci Rev 51(4):297–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurrer KE (2018) The history of the theory of structures: searching for equilibrium, 2nd edn. Wilhelm Ernst & Sohn Verlag für Architectur und technische Wissenschaften GmbH & Co. KG

  • Lluis i Ginovart J, Coll-Pla S, Costa-Jover A, López Piquer M (2017a) Hookes chain theory and the construction of catenary arches in Spain. Int J Archit Herit 11(5):703–716

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lluis i Ginovart J, Costa-Jover A, Coll-Pla S, López Piquer M (2017b) Layout of catenary arches in the Spanish enlightenment and modernism. Nexus Netw J 19(1):85–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makris N, Alexakis H (2013) The effect of stereotomy on the shape of the thrust-line and the minimum thickness of semicircular masonry arches. Arch Appl Mech 83(10):1511–1533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Méry E (1840) Sur l’équilibre des voûtes en berceau. Annales des Ponts et Chaussées 1(1):50–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Milanković M (1907) Theorie der Druckkurven. Zeitschrift für Mathematik und Physik 55:1–27

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Moseley H (1843) The mechanical principles of engineering and architecture. Longman Brown, Green and Longmans, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Nikolić D (2017) Thrust line analysis and the minimum thickness of pointed masonry arches. Acta Mech 228(6):2219–2236

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Osserman R (2010) How the Gateway arch got its shape. Nexus Netw J 12(2):167–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poleni G (1748) Memorie istoriche della gran cupola del Tempio Vaticano. Stamperia del Seminario, Padova

    Google Scholar 

  • Poncelet JV (1852) Examen critique et historique des principales théories ou solutions concernant l’équilibre des voûtes. Comptes rendus 35:577–587

    Google Scholar 

  • Radelet-de Grave P (2003) Essays on the history of mechanics. Springer Basel AG, chap The use of a particular form of the parallelogram law of forces for the building of vaults (1650–1750), pp 135–163

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Romano A, Ochsendorf JA (2010) The mechanics of Gothic masonry arches. Int J Archit Herit 4(1):59–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salimbeni L (1787) Degli archi e delle volte. Dionigi Ramanzini, Verona

    Google Scholar 

  • Stirling J (1717) Lineæ tertii ordinis Neutonianæ. Oxford

  • Truesdell C (1960) The rational mechanics of flexible or elastic bodies 1638–1788. Introduction to Leonhardi Euleri Opera Omnia, 2nd series vol XI. Zürich, Orell Füssli

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ware S (1809) A treatise of the properties of arches, and their abutment piers. Longman Hurst, Rees and Orme, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Young T (1824) Supplement to the fourth, fifth and sixth editions of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, vol 2. Archibald Constable, Edinburgh. Bridge, pp 497–520

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Professor Ivica Bošnjak for providing valuable remarks and help regarding thrust line analysis carried out in this research. The paper was done within the Project No. TR36042 supported by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Technical Sciences, Department of Architecture, University of Novi Sad, Trg Dositeja Obradovića 6, 21000, Novi Sad, Serbia

    Dimitrije Nikolić

Authors
  1. Dimitrije Nikolić
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dimitrije Nikolić.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Mehmet Polat Saka

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nikolić, D. Catenary arch of finite thickness as the optimal arch shape. Struct Multidisc Optim 60, 1957–1966 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-019-02304-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-019-02304-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation