21
Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch By Laila Dingwall, Casey Byers, Katie Glore, and Kyle Fowler

Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

  • Upload
    sloan

  • View
    61

  • Download
    2

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch. By Laila Dingwall, Casey Byers, Katie Glore, and Kyle Fowler. Outline. Introduction Prototype Construction Testing Final Design Construction Testing Evaluation and Conclusion. Efficient Meet Constraints. Goals. 8in. 19in. 2.5in. 16in. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

By Laila Dingwall, Casey Byers, Katie Glore, and Kyle Fowler

Page 2: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Outline

• Introduction• Prototype

– Construction– Testing

• Final Design– Construction– Testing

• Evaluation and Conclusion

Page 3: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Goals

– Efficient – Meet Constraints

8in

16in

19in

2.5in

Page 4: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Prototype Testing

Component Analysis

Page 5: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Component: Compression

• Keep depressors short for more strength– Longer members fail

under less weight • Make sure to pick

stronger depressors from box when selecting

Page 6: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Prototype Testing

Prototype Analysis

Page 7: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Research

• The design of the arch of the Fremont Bridge (Portland, OR) inspired the design of the top and bottom arches

• From various truss structures it was noticed that all utilize triangles. – This knowledge helped in

the connecting of the arches together

Above photo courtesy of the Office of Auditor,

City of Portland

Construction of the Fremont Bridge, 1973

Page 8: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Designs

Solid Arch

Arch with String SupportTruss Arch

Page 9: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Design Pros and ConsDesign Strengths Weaknesses

Solid Arch•Strong •Stable •Solid

•Heavy •Limited Supplies •No Room for Internal Structure •Weak Points at Glued Joints

Arch with String Support

•Strongest (looking) •Counteracting Forces •Triangle Shape

•Heavy •Long Pieces •Complex •No Room for Internal Structure •Weak Pints at Bottom

Truss-Arch

•Lightest •Stable with 2 Arches •Room for Internal Structure •Fewer Supplies Needed

•Not as Strong as Others •Lots of Joints

Page 10: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Final Design

Page 11: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Prototype Testing

Prototype Performance

Page 12: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Testing ProcessPrototype Weight: 0.712 lbs

Anticipated Load: 100 lbs

Prototype Maximum Load: 165 lbs

Prototype Efficiency: 232

Page 13: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Why the Prototype Failed• Notice how the bridge is

not squarely on the jig

– This caused it to slip off

Page 14: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Final Design

Page 15: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Design

Sheet

Page 16: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch
Page 17: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

VS

Prototype Final

Weight .712 lbs .62 lbs

Max Load 165 lbs 341 lbs

Efficiency 232 550

137% Increase

Page 18: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

FailurePoints

Page 19: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Conclusion

Page 20: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Conclusion• Arch bridge used to distribute

the weight to the ends of bridge and to the jig.

• Diamonds were used on the top of bridge was used to push pressure to the arches.

• Internal X structure used to keep it from collapsing at the point of pressure.

• Precise measurements were made to see that the bridge was built to fit perfectly into the jig.

Page 21: Bridge Project: Team Truss-Arch

Conclusion• Bridge failed both times on the

ends and started to buckle at the diagonal connectors.

• Shorter sticks could have been used for the connectors.

• Glue other then the hot glue could have been used for joint strength. (Time was the reason for initial use.)

• More reinforcements to keep the arches from bending.