Lab 01 Report

Abhinav Subramanian
9/29/2011 Professor Perucchio ME 104Q

Test 1 (intact) Member 1 Member 2 Member 3 Member 4 Member 5 Member 6 Test 2 (failure) Member 1 Member 2 Member 3 Member 4 Member 5 Member 6

Run 1 -1.83 N -0.88 N 4.22 N 2.34 N 14.04 N 15.15 N Run 1 -1.71 N 0.39 N 6.35 N -5.03 N 5.47 N 18.97 N

Run 2 -0.74 N 0.08 N 5.15 N -0.95 N (error) 9.46 N (error) 16.64 N Run 2 -1.22 N 2.24 N 7.14 N -5.45 N 4.84 N 17.34 N

Run 3 -0.74 N 1.45 N 7.47 N -1.15 N (error) 9.48 N (error) N 16.92 N Run 3 -1.15 N 0.95 N 6.87 N -5.36 N 4.42 N 18.91 N

Along the top of the bridge, there are various that are acting on different members of even a simple bridge. During the experiment, the load was hung straight from the middle, thereby making the weight of the load act directly on the middle of the bridge onto the members on the top. Members 1, 2 and 3 are all the members on the top side of the bridge. On member 1, the force is a negative value for all three runs. This means that the force is acting in the opposite direction than on which it is supposed to. After the mass is placed on the centre of the bridge (Around member 3), the force on this member is acting downwards. Since member 3 is closest to the load, it exerts the most amount of force on the topside of the bridge. Members 1 and 2 however, exert a relatively smaller amount. There are two main force paths along the top from members 4-5 to joints 6 and 7 all the way to the ground. This is also the load path. Forces differ from element to element because they are divided by various columns built in between the bridge which also absorb some of the force as it moves along the bridge. Also, some of the forces differ as they could be acting as a reaction. There are also axial forces along the bridge which also differ from member to member.

Figure 1: The axial forces along an arch bridge. The arch is squeezed together, and this squeezing force (axial force) is carried outward along the curve to the supports at each end. This is mainly the reason why members 5 and 6 have such high values as if they werent present, the bridge would fall apart. As one can see the axial forces in member 5 is different from the axial force in number 6 even though both are on opposite sides. Member 4 is placed directly under member 3 and is the middle of the bottom arch of the bridge. As you can see, this member isnt taking as much force as the member above and it acts as a support for it.

Figure 2: Lateral view of bridge before superimposition. The axial forces could vary due to the following reasons: The load was set up closer to one of the two sides thereby altering the axial forces between the two sides of the bridge as one side could take more force than the other. There could be a minor lab error as no reading can be the same There could be a problem with the model of the bridge built.

As you can see the damaged member has affected all other parts of the bridge overall increasing the number of axial forces across the bridge as a whole. The top of the bridge relies on 10-11 and 14-15 for support and as one of them have been removed The axial

forces on the top part of an arch bridge move along the bridge from opposite sides and cancel each other out at the exact centre. Although after the inclusion of the load, the average force of member 1 has significantly increased and due to the negative sign is moving towards the left. The force on member 2 is also moving towards the right whilst the force on member 3 has also increased and is continued moving towards the right. This doesnt seem to differ much from the intact bridges load path although the forces on some members have increased. The axial movement along the arch is that the arch is squeezed together, and this squeezing force (axial force) is carried outward along the curve to the supports at each end. In the damaged structure, in member 4 the axial force has changed in direction thereby pulling it to the left. Also the force has significantly increased. This proves that the load path has been altered from the original in a significant way. There is no apparent change in members 5 and 6 although the force on member 6 has increased. The force has probably increased due the removal of 14-15 which pushes the forces down through the other side (10-11/member 5). This thereby proves that the damaged bridge affects the load path from two directions to just one. Member 1 2 3 4 5 6 High value -.74 1.45 7.47 2.34 14.04 16.92 Low Value -1.83 -.88 4.22 -1.15 9.46 15.15 Average -1.1 0.217 5.61 .08 11 16.24 Error -1 10.74 0.58 43.63 0.41 0.11

Such errors could become highly dangerous if only one reading was taken as the readings differ from run to run and if engineers worked on a value which was an error, it could cost them heavily. There are many factors that influence errors such as, the testing environment, the tester even the audience. Also, slight faults in the model or slight faults in the test. All these factors could add up as laboratory errors and they are very common. This is the reason why it is always beneficial to take more than one reading. Member 4 is the one with the highest error. This is a crucial member as it lies directly under the bridge and if it is missing or constructed with the wrong value, the flow of force would be completely disrupted if not stopped which would result in the collapse of the bridge.

Figure 1: Taken from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/buildingbig/bridge/arch_forces.html