digg

Too bad the link has no comments, discussion or explanation. What is the cost compared to other kinds of drawbridges? What moves those semicircle things up? Where does the extra length of the cables go when it raises so the road comes up with the supports? If that is done by winches, won't it be frought with more problems? Does it have less transition time than other types of bridges (in which neither maritime or land traffic can use it)? Doesn't it block more shoreline access than regular bridges and drawbridges? When those disjointed pieces of roadway come back together, how do they insure that they always meet close enough for a smooth ride? How do they keep differential shear stresses from moving the sections relative to each other?

Sorry for being the naysayer, but since there is no text on the linked pages, I can tell you that these are the kinds of questions that have to be answered before it could ever me more than a computer drawing.

Looks awesome but probably won't work well

Looks great as long as you can jump the gaps! http://www.diegorosales.com/projects/vf_01.htm

how would the center part arch up like that?

More of his work: http://www.diegorosales.com/

Doesn't even come close to appearing to be structurally functional for traffic loads.

What advantage does the extra space give you? There is still only one lane in the middle. Looks cool, but I don't know where this gets you.

But now what will Bond do to escape criminals?

http://www.burohappold.com/BH/PRJ_INF_VenusFlytrap ...
They list it as a Concept here...

Looks cool, but also looks seriously impractical.

The main issue here is cost. It looks like it would cost as much in materials as a standard international height bridge (or whatever height is needed for the span). The appeal of the drawbridge is that it is cheaper vs building the needed height, or there isn't enough room to get the cars up that high. So far the only appeal I see is that its shaped like a vagina....
Maybe that isn't so bad after all.... Architects tend to focus on the penis to much when they design......

It is almost like a large bear trap. Very cool concept. Now I am waiting for someone to say the over used "It's a trap!" comment. =|

What the hell is going on in that picture?

As a structural engineer, I can tell you that makes no sense

Nice art project

I'm thinking there would be some kind of pulley system underneath the road in the middle that when the cables are coiled, they pull on each side causing the side parts to rise-- in turn decreasing the length of the cable and simultaneously lifting the road up into the air. Of course the road must stretch so that is why you see gaps when it lifted into the air. As it lowers, the segments of road will condense again and form a gapless road.

Still...there would be a LOT of stress on the center part-- it would have to be engineered VERY VERY well to keep the thing from ripping itself apart. The main problem however is that even at lowered stage, it is under heavy lateral stress. Also, what happens when cars drive on top of it? Does it close like a bear trap? What will keep the outsides from closing under the weight of the road being pulled down?

here's a groovy idea: make the bridge a high-rise.

i wonder at the expense of such a strange bridge versus building one that's just, tall enough to let boats pass.

look cool

no

Is it me or are the bits to the side a little...superfluous?

Isn't this just a variation of the Gateshead Millennium Bridge? http://www.betterpublicbuildings.gov.uk/finalists/ ...

It's based on a woman's legs?

Definitely the work of a designer not a bridge engineer.

looks alot like the bridge in tiwan http://www.ce.ntu.edu.tw/photo/bridge/bridge28bTen ...

http://www.diegorosales.com/

It is clearly labia inspired.

there are bridge 'like' this in the UK, like the mellenium bridge.
http://www.whitleybayu3a.co.uk/Bridge1%20for%20Web ...

The amount of money it would cost to built that bridge could feed the hungry in 3rd world countries for months. Hopefully someone in their right mind would put a stop to that. Just build a taller bridge.

Maybe someone smarter than me can explain this.. If the bridge just flexes upward to allow ships to pass, why not just build a static bridge in that upper position in the first place and not deal with any of the 'flex' problems?

well since the roadway is sectioned, it will be very unstable. only held up by the cables.. also, it is still an undrivable surface, so i don't see the point. Also dangerous, because each cable is mission critical. As shown.. the cables have to be withdrawn and extended.. no to mention it feeling like a trampoline. But hey, add it to a James Bond movie.

Another case of form to the exclusion of function.

stupid idea, but it looks cool

His work is not that impressive, most of his designs lack feasibility.

Because there's something wrong with the current designs?

Here's a little more info on it. http://www.burohappold.com/BH/PRJ_INF_VenusFlytrap ...

it looks like a *ussy to me

isnt a draw bridge, a bridge like the ones found on a castle. Where the bridge is "drawn" away from one side, not allowing invaders to infiltrate the castle?

Not Dissimilar to the Gateshead Millennium Bridge
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Gateshead+Millenn ...

It looks like one of those things at the mall they measure your foot with.

I see that Cobra Command is now working on civil engineering projects

Should be re-titled:

Making the simple drawbridge more complicated and expensive.

va-jay-jay

Reinventing the drawbridge...
Why?

Cool, yet another example of reinvention that is clearly NOT stealing.

It seems kind of pointless to design a drawbridge that can move but still can't let tall boats through.

Why bother? Why spend the money on such a thing rather than just building an arched bridge to begin with?

what would be the point, if the bridge could actually get that high? Why not just keep it static at that height, I mean really..

Venus bridge. Lol

A classic example of form over function.