CreationnewIt is often difficult to obtain universal praise, and even if they cross technological borders and reshape the structure of industry, voices against change still exist.
In 2021, Amsterdam, famous for his canal, unveiled this revolutionary bridge and met such a situation.
This revolutionary bridge ultimately failed to cross the controversy – although the first 3D printed bridge in the world was an achievement to manufacture wishes, it failed to gain the recognition of everyone.
For some, this is an extraordinary technological step; For others, it is a visual failure in the urban landscape.
Why 3D bridges cause controversy
Despite the major achievements of the project, many local residents are still deeply dissatisfied with its design, believing that the too modern form is incompatible with the classic architecture of the red district. The bridge was initially installed in Oudezijds Achterburgwal in the form of temporary permit, replacing the old bridge under renovation.
However, in the midst of continuous criticism, the 3D printed bridge was demolished in 2023.
Finally, the old bridge, which had a history of hundreds of years, was restored, and the new bridge which could have become a symbol of the advanced urban design disappeared.
Ponts safety
Is the most important question of public concern the weight of: is the structure reliable? Skeptics can imagine it as a fragile structure like a resin or a wire produced by a domestic 3D printer, but the reality is very different.
The Bridge project was directed by MX3D, a 3D metal printing company in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. It took six years to finish and was built using loads and robotic stainless steel weapons combined with advanced modeling software.
The entire bridge is made of 4,500 kg stainless steel (9920 lb), and its resistance is not different from that of traditional metal bridges. Structural security is not disputed – but aesthetic security is another matter.
Engineering victory, visual failure
Although the bridge witnesses innovation, it does not correspond to the historic aesthetics of the city. Despite its technical meaning, the opposition proves that sometimes tradition goes to the defeat of progress.
