You are on page 1of 30

BUILDING STRUCTURES

[ARC 2213]

FETTUCCINE TRUSS
BRIDGE ANALYSIS
REPORT
CHOO AI LIN
0317253
ELAINE BONG
0310432
LAU EE TIAN
0309596
SOH YOH SHING
0308010
S U R AY Y N S E LVA N
0309818

TA B L E O F C O N T E N T S
1 INTRODUCTION

01

2 METHODLOGY
2.1 PRECEDENT STUDY
2.2 MAKING OF FETTUCCINE BRIDGE
2.3 REQUIREMENT

02
02
03

3 PRECEDENT STUDY

04

4 A N A LY S I S
4 . 1 S T R E N G T H O F MAT E R I A L
4 . 2 A D H E S I V E A N A LY S I S

08
10

5 MODEL MAKING
5.1 METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION
5.2 JOINT

11
13

6 TESTING
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4

FIRST BRIDGE
SECOND BRIDGE
THIRD BRIDGE
FINAL BRIDGE

14
16
18
20

7 D E S I G N M O D I F I C AT I O N
7 . 1 FA IL U R E R E A S O N IN G
7.2 SOLUTION

24
25

8 CONCLUSION

26

9 APPENDIX

27

10 REFERENCES

28

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

1 INTRODUCTION
This project aims to develop our understanding of tensile and compressive strength of
construction materials by understanding the distribution of force in a truss.

In order to do achieve that, we were required carry out a precedent study on a truss
bridge of our choice, analyzing the connections, arrangements and orientations of the
members. Once that was completed, we were required to design and construct a truss
bridge made out of fettuccine.

The requirements for this bridge include it having a 750mm clear span and a maximum
weight of 200g. This bridge will then be tested to fail and we were required to analyze
the reasons of its failure and calculate its efficiency.

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

01

2 METHODOLOGY
2.1 PRECEDENT STUDY

By looking through precedent studies to have a better understanding of the types of trusses
available. Next, understanding the forces that would be exerted to the trusses;
compression and tension, would allow us to make adjustment to our bridge, that would best

suit the given material; fettuccine.

2.2 MAKING OF FETTUCCINE BRIDGE

PHASE 01: STRENGTH OF MATERIAL


Understanding the properties of the fettuccine is important in order to build one bridge that

can carry maximum load. For the tensile strength in the fettuccine is considerable low when
compare to aluminium which has the same amount of stiffness to the fettuccine.

PHASE 02 : ADHESIVE
Choosing the right type of adhesive is important as it plays a huge role in this assignment.
As there are many types of adhesive in the market that each has their own function and
characteristics. Not only the type of adhesive is important but the brand of adhesive is

important as well, for different brand has different quality and choosing one that suits
constructing the fettuccine bridge is primary.

PHASE 03: MODEL MAKING


To ensure precision in our model making, Autocad drawings are drawn in 1:1 scale and
plotted out to ensure precision and ease our process. And in order to strengthen our bridge
as much as possible, each pasta is marked individually as each has their own location of

placement and length, and are glued accordance.

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

02

2 METHODOLOGY
PHASE 04 : MODEL TESTING
Finished models are being tested after placing aside to allow the adhesive to sit on the model.
By placing weight on the middle of intermediate member to ensure that load is evenly

distributed. All these are being recorded to allow us to fix and analysis our bridge.

2.3 REQUIREMENTS

To have a clear span of 750mm

Not exceeding the weight of 200g

Only material allowed is fettuccine pasta and adhesive

Allowed to use any type of adhesive possible

Workmanship is put to consideration as part of aesthetic value

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

03

3 PRECEDENT STUDY
HESHBON BRIDGE, INDIANA (1941)

The Heshbon Bridge, located at Indiana, Pennsylvania state in the United State of America,
is one of the last state-standard truss bridges built. Many bridge were constructed across
the Pennsylvania state from the late 1920's through 1941. This bridge was constructed in
1941 by Paul Construction Company and Pennsylvania State Highway Department which
has a main span of 153ft(46.6m) with a total length of 158 ft(48.2m) and 26ft(7.9m)
r o a d w a y
w i d t h
o v e r
t h e
B l a c k
L i c k
C r e e k .
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

04

3 PRECEDENT STUDY

The map above shows the bridge is located over Black Lick Creek In Heshbon,
Indiana County, Pennsylvania.
This bridge is a relatively small example of Pennsylvania's very attractive standard plan of
1930s to 1940s truss bridge design. As such, it features a shallower portal bracing design
that other bridges built to this standard. In 2009, the government wanted to replaced the
bridge but fortunately they decided to rehabilitate it instead of replacing it. This will include a
deck replacement as well as structural steel repairs. So, the Heshbon bridge represents a
good preservation project and it became one of the tourist attraction in Pennsylvania.

Heshbon Bridge Before Restore

Heshbon Bridge from 1941-2009


Old railroad bridge with wooden
pathway.

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

Heshbon Bridge After Restore

Heshbon Bridge 2009 until today


After rehabilitate, the bridge
became a bike path

05

3 PRECEDENT STUDY

The 1941, skewed, 158ft long, riveted Parker truss bridge is supported on ashlar
abutments with concrete caps. The trusses are traditionally composed with the upper
and lower chords being built up box sections, and the verticals and diagonals rolled I
sections. Lateral and sway bracing are laced channels. The deck is reinforced
c o n cr e t e , a n d t h e s t e e l r a i l i n g s i n si d e t h e t r u s s l i n e s a r e o r i g i n a l .

TRUSS CONNECTIONS AND MEMBERS

Portal view on bridge

Top chord connections

Connections of truss web

Bottom chord connections.

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

06

3 PRECEDENT STUDY

Vertical member detail

Abutments

Railing

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

End Post

Ashlar abutment

Railing detail

07

4 A N A LY S I S
4 . 1 S T R E N G T H O F M AT E R I A L
WEIGHT
With the requirement of only 200G, we had to creative solution, to reinforce our bridge
while making sure that the weight of bridge does not exceed the requirement. Thus we
came our with solution by selecting parts that holds load and reinforce it by adding layers
to it. But bearing in mind that the more layers added, the more weight it holds.
Before we started our model making, we did a little experiment of the maximum weight the
fettuccine can carry. We tried out with 4 different layers to carry out this experiment.
Experiment (left to right):
I. One Layer
II. Two Layers
III. Three Layers
IV. Four Layers

Properties of spaghetti (dry)


1. Ultimate tensile strength ~2000 psi
2. Stiffness (Youngs modulus)
E ~10,000,000 psi
(E=stress/strain)

Experiment 01: One Layer


Members starts to bend after load is applied with just one layer of
fettuccine. Total weight being 0.56G.

Experiment 02: Two Layers


In the two layer of fettuccine, a slight bend could be seen in the
fettuccine, although it is not as extreme as Experiment 1. Total
weight being 1.17G

Experiment 03: Three Layers


When load is applied, members could be seen slightly sturdier
when compare to Experiment 2. But a slight bend in the middle
could be seen. Total weight being 2.8G

Experiment 4: Four Layers


With four layers, it has proven to be the most stable option
among all experiments. Total weight being 2.05G.

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

08

4 A N A LY S I S
4 . 1 S T R E N G T H O F M AT E R I A L
ORIENTATION

Horizontal members were placed between


trusses, to hold both pieces of the bridge
together. They held no force besides balancing
the whole truss bridge. Hence, we reduced the
horizontal members to one layer in our second
and third bridge, for our bridge to fit the
requirement in terms of the bridges weight.

V
S

Method 01

Method 02

Method 01 was used in our case


because the members were fitted
between the arch and the bottom
chord. This can ensure that the
load was distributed evenly to the
arch. Comparing to Method 02,
which the bracings were glued on
the outside truss. Thus, Method 01
was a better choice of orientation.
Where Method 02 is still able to
distribute the load but the bracings
were not secured onto arch and
bottom chord, relying on the glue

The intermediate member is where


the hook that held on load is
placed. Making its role important.
Where the orientation and its
layers are vital. We found out the
load can be transferred more
efficiently when it was placed
exactly in the middle in upright
position, where the load can be
distributed evenly to the sides.
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

09

4 A N A LY S I S
4 . 2 A D H E S I V E A N A LY S I S
Three different kinds of glue used to ensure the joints are strong and thus strengthen
the bridge.

Type of Adhesive

Xtraseals Super Glue

Selleys Supa Glue

UHU Glue

Advantages

High efficiency
Fast solidify time
Easy to use
Easy to bend fettuccine
when applied

Disadvantages
Cracked joint after
dried for few days

High efficiency
Fastest solidify time
Easy to use

Cracked joint after


dried for few days

Easy to use

Low efficiency
Causes flexible joints
Longer solidify time
Causes bridge to
weigh more

Selleys Supa Glue was used the most while constructing our fettuccine bridge. It has
high efficiency and it dried faster compared to the other adhesives, as it is more
concentrated when compare to Xtraseals Super Glue. To make sure the glue worked
at its best, allow the glue to settle in the bridge to make sure it is dry before the
testing it. This is to ensure the bridge perform at its best.
The Xtraseal super glue is only used on the arch where slower solidify of glue is
needed in order to buy some time while constructing the arch, for better precision.
UHU Glue is avoided if possible, as it causes the joints to be flexible. It also requires
longer time to dry. Making it the worst option, for joints should be rigid.

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

10

5 MODEL MAKING
5.1METHODOFCONSTRUCTION

01. First, we printed out a copy of


the design of our bridge so that it will
be easier for us to bend the
fettuccine to get the shape of the
arc.

02. We started off by doing the


bottom chord of the bridge by
dividing the base of the bridge into 4
layers with different length.

Joint

03. Then we glued the it together


using the method above to distribute
the breaking point of the base
evenly.

04. For the arc of the bridge, we


also divided it into 4 layers. In order
the get the shape of the arc, gluing
it layer by layer and bend it
accordingly.

05. We cut and glued the


truss and the bracing of the
After completing one side of
we used the same method
other side

06. Finally, we connected the 2 sides


of the bridge by placing horizontal
fettuccine in between.

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

vertical
bridge.
bridge,
for the

11

5 MODEL MAKING
5.1METHODOFCONSTRUCTION

7. The middle piece of the


horizontal truss is reinforced as it
was the piece that holds the
weight.

8. The top parts of the bridge are


joined with double layers of
fattucine.

9. The completed final model.

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

12

5 MODEL MAKING
5.2 JOINT
PLAIN BUTT JOINT

1.
Two
fettuccine
doubled-layer to make it
stronger

3: Repeat this procedure.

2. Join one fettuccine to


other the end of another
fettuccine.

Final Product

OVERLAID JOINT

1. Randomly choose 2
fettuccine.

2. Place a fettuccine
horizontally in between of
the 2 fettucine.

3. Trim the excess and


repeat the procedure.

Final Product

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

13

6 TESTING
6.1 FIRST BRIDGE
For our first bridge we used the
precedent study as a guideline for our
first bridge. By changing it to an arch to
allow the bridge to increase the
compression member. On our first trial
we did not focus much on the weight of
our bridge but more our reinforcing it and
understanding the adhesive and the orientation of the trusses. Although our required clear
span is just 750MM we added an additional 74MM on each sides of our bridge to allow it to
rest on the table, in order to spread the load applied on bridge. Each segments having a
total length of 80MM allowing us to produce total of an odd 11segments where we produce
just one X truss on the middle segments. This is part of our technique in order to produce
as little weight than producing an even number of segments where we would be force to
produce two X truss in order to be centralized.

Model Testing

Middle of intermediate member broke off after 6KG

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

14

6 TESTING
6.1 FIRST BRIDGE
Compression
Tension

209MM

L
O
A
D

908MM
90MM
FAILURE

Length:
Width:
Height:
Weight:

908MM
90MM
209MM
225G

Max. Load
Efficiency

6KG
0.16

After a few trials, only the intermediate member would


broke after applying force. Proving that our truss is
stable. Thus, the only problem with our bridge is the
weight of it. Resulting in the second bridge.

Two layers

Four layers

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

15

6 TESTING
6.2 SECOND BRIDGE

The
second
bridge
also
followed the design of the
precedent study - Heshbon
Bridge similar to the first bridge.
The first bridge was too heavy
as we have a weight limit stated
by the brief which was 200g.
We decided to maintain the
height and the bottom chord
chord because these two were the most important members in a truss. So we reduced the
layers of the zero force members which were the horizontal members holding both truss
together. Two intermediate members were place in the middle where the load would be
hung. One, which had four layers, was placed in the centre of the whole truss to hold the
both trusses together. The other, which had eight layers, was placed diagonally on the
bottom chord intersecting with the middle member.

Intermediate member bending just before it breaks.

Broken intermediate members

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

16

6 TESTING
6.2 SECOND BRIDGE
Compression
Tension

209MM

L
O
A
D

900MM
90MM
FAILURE

Length:
Height:
Width:
Weight:

908MM
90MM
209MM
225G

Max. Load:
Efficiency:

5KG
0.12

Only the intermediate members of the second bridge


broke off without damaging the truss which means that
it had not achieved its maximum efficiency yet with the
load of 5KG.

Two layers

Four layers

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

One layer

17

6 TESTING
6.3 THIRD BRIDGE

After considering from


failure of the second
b r i d ge d e sig n , we
intended to reduce the
height of the arch
besides increasing stability, we also reduced 0.7G of weight which contributes into higher
efficiency. Total height of the third bridge is 178MM. Proven that our proposal of reducing
the height was a success. Conversely, when the height decreased, the center of gravity
become lower hence the bridge become more stable., standing up straight raises the
center of gravity above the base of support and decreases stability. The amount of layer
used in each location of the member is the same because we couldnt afford to lessen the
layers of the bottom chord or the arch, thus we choose to shorten the height instead.

Perspective view of third bridge.


Placement of horizontal member is the
same with previous bridge

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

Model testing.

18

6 TESTING
6.3 THIRD BRIDGE
Compression
Tension

FAILURE
178MM

L
O
A
D
908MM
90MM
FAILURE

Length
Width
Height
Weight

908MM
90MM
178MM
200G

The reason third bridge failed is because the horizontal


member was just one layer causing the joint not to be
strong enough to withstand the load exerted onto the
bridge. And the intermediate member broke fall off,
issuing a problem with workmanship.

Max. Load: 3.8KG


Efficiency: 0.0.722

Two layers

Four layers

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

One layer

19

6 TESTING
6.4 FINAL BRIDGE

After the testing of our third bridge,


our arch and trusses were still in
tact and only the horizontal
braces connecting the trusses
were broken. We decided to rearrange our horizontal bracing. Instead of using one strip of
fettuccine we decided to have two layers but reduce the number of horizontal bracing, thus
we managed not to exceed much weight as stated in requirement. We mainly placed these
bracings where the forces would act most upon.

By rearranging and adding the additional layer of to the horizontal fettuccine members, it
managed to increased the efficiency of our bridge. During the final testing of our bridge, the
middle of the immediate member of our bridge broke under the force exerted by the load.

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

20

6 TESTING
6.4 FINAL BRIDGE
Compression
Tension

178MM

L
O
A
D

908MM

90MM
FAILURE

Two layers

Four layers

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

One layer

21

6 TESTING
6.4 FINAL BRIDGE
MODEL TESTING

Weight: ~ 500g

Weight: ~ 1000g

Weight: ~ 1500g

Weight: ~ 2000g

Weight: ~ 2500g

Weight: ~ 3000g

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

22

6 TESTING
6.4 FINAL BRIDGE

Weight: ~ 3500g

Weight: ~ 4000g

Weight: ~ 4500g

Weight: ~ 4700g

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

Length:
Width:
Height:
Weight:

908mm
90mm
178mm
202g

Max. Load:
Efficiency:

4.7kg
0.109

23

7 D E S I G N M O D I F I C AT I O N
7.1 FAILURE REASONING
Reason 01:
The bottom chord of our bridges arent completely touching the base at both sides, as it is
only partially touching the base. This is due to the lack of precision in our workmanship.
This cause our bridge to be unbalance and not stable. Our models could have slipped off
when load is being exerted towards bridge. Causing our bridge to be twisted.

Reason 02:
As some of the is slanted and not 180 flat, for nothing is perfect. As it is crucial to use a flat
fettuccine pasta for when layering the width of layered fettuccine would be uneven at
slanted area. And with the slanted part the load distribution would be disturb and unstable

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

24

7 D E S I G N M O D I F I C AT I O N
7.2 SOLUTION
Solution 01:
Using masking tape on the members onto the printed drawing, to ensure that members
does not slipped off. Thus member would remain constant and provide precision. But one
would need to make take into consideration that masking tape is not as strong as we want
t h e m t o , s o me mb e r s wo u l d s h i f t wh e n wo r k i n g on o t h e r me mb e r s .

Solution 02:
Using UHU Glue to fill the gaps in between joints would help Reason 01, but bearing in
mind that weight of bridge would increase and aesthetic value of the bridge would fall. By
reinforcing both Super Glue and UHU Glue, structure seems to work just fine with it.

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

25

8 CONCLUSION
From this assignment we were able to have a better grasp of understanding

the load and compressive strength of construction material. Teaching us


methods as to constructing a building structurally stable. As forces and loads
plays an important role in this assignment, aiding us to understand how it is

distributed in truss. Not forgetting that we were to be creative and maintain


high level of aesthetic value while putting the minimizing the amount of
m aterials used. Hence prom oting sustainable architecture.

Group photo along with final bridge


BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

26

9 APPENDIX
As for our individual part, we were assigned to further analyse total of 5 trusses. Each
were distributed to following :

First Case:

Elaine Bong Poh Hui

Second Case:

Lau Ee Tian

Third Case:

Surayyn Selvan

Fourth Case:

Choo Ai Lin

Fifth Case:

Soh You Shing

The analysis and calculations of trusses are attached after this page.

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

27

10 REFERENCES
Historic Bridges.org.(2012,January 11)..Retrived September
20,2014,from http://www.historicbridges.org/info/about.htm

BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]

28