User:Jboots512/sandbox

Williamsburg Bridge (Structural Analysis)

Even though it alleviates the burden of a large portion of the Brooklyn-Manhattan traffic from the Brooklyn Bridge, the Williamsburg Bridge does not get nearly as much attention as it’s counterpart down the river. This lack of attention may be justified in the sense that the Williamsburg Bridge is not structural art. While this bridge does have its uses in terms of diverting traffic, it cannot be classified as structural art because it does not meet all the requirements: efficiency, economics, and elegance. The Williamsburg Bridge was completed December 31, 1909. The bridge connects the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn to Manhattan. It is a steel suspension bridge that uses steel cables to carry the load in the middle and lower arches to carry the load on the side spans. The towers rise 310ft and the main span is 1600ft, the longest in the world at the time. The designer of the bridge was engineer Gustav Lindenthal. From a scientific perspective, the use of all steel towers and materials was a very efficient solution. The steel is lighter and less expensive than the heavy masonry towers used on the nearby Brooklyn Bridge. The steel allows for the towers to be built higher and with less of a foundation. The Williamsburg Bridge also has steel arches underneath the side spans to carry the load. This allowed for the bridge to have light short cables running down from the towers to the side span.. Elegant is not a word that will accurately describe the Williamsburg Bridge. The bridge’s towers look like two power- line towers, not like the towers of an elegant bridge form. The nearby Brooklyn Bridge, with its large masonry towers and steel cables is a lasting image and is a symbol of the New York City. The Williamsburg Bridge is not a symbol of the city, but a secondary bridge with unimpressive features that leave no lasting image. Economically the Williamsburg Bridge was designed to be a success. The proposed budget for the bridge was $7 million compared to more than twice that, $15 million, for the Brooklyn Bridge. This however was not the case as the final cost of the original structure was $24.2 million. The cost comparison to the Brooklyn Bridge is even more staggering when inflation is accounted for because in 1909 a bridge that cost $15,000,000 to build in 1883 would only cost $14,456,266. The bridge has also needed many repairs along the years so that it could keep up with the increasing traffic demands, and the heavier loads. The bridge also has little social impact on New York. It is merely a bridge used to take traffic away from the more popular Brooklyn Bridge. The Williamsburg Bridge does serve its intended purpose. It created another passage from the borough of Brooklyn to the borough of Manhattan. The Williamsburg Bridge is not however structural art because it fails to meet all the requirements. The Williamsburg Bridge does make an efficient use of material. This bridge is however, is not elegant, it is not a bridge that is taken much notice of and is consequently not symbolic. The Bridge also fails economically because instead of a proposed $7 million, which would have been highly economical, the bridge ended up costing $24.2 million. With the Williamsburg failing two of the three “E” requirements for structural art, it is clearly not structural art.