Structural Design and Behavior

of Two Smith Trusses
Stephen Buonopane, PhD, PE
Associate Professor
Rooke Chair in the Historical and
Social Context of Engineering
Bucknell University
Lewisburg, PA US
stephen.buonopane@bucknell.edu

Sarah Ebright
formerly undergraduate, Bucknell University
Structural Designer, KL&A, Inc., Basalt, CO US

Alex Smith
formerly undergraduate, Bucknell University
Structural Engineer, ARUP New York, NY US

Acknowledgements
Christopher Marston of the Historic American Engineering Record
and the National Covered Bridges Recording Project
Dario Gasparini of Case Western Reserve University
David Simmons of the Ohio Historical Society
Ron Mattox of Jobes Henderson & Associates
Emily Daniels formerly of Bucknell University
Rooke Chair in the Historical and Social Context of Engineering

(HAER PA-622)

Objective

Overview

Objective

Study Smith trusses as engineering and historic artifacts.

Overview

Objective

Study Smith trusses as engineering and historic artifacts.
Not a structural analysis for repair or rehab.

Overview

Not a structural analysis for repair or rehab.Objective • • Study Smith trusses as engineering and historic artifacts. Overview • • • Smith Bridge Company Historic engineering context with other truss types Smith truss types • • • unique aspects evolution of form Structural analyses • • • member forces & stresses deflections & camber connections .

1833-1898) Smith Bridge Company (1867-1890) (photos: Wood & Simmons 2007) . Smith (c.Robert W.

Smith Bridge Company (1867-1890) Toledo Tippecanoe City .

(Library of Congress) .

(David Simmons collection ) .

Not All Smith Bridge Co. Bridges are Smith Trusses Feedwire Road Bridge (1870) Montgomery Co. IN (HAER IN-50) ...com/oh/montgomery/feedwire-road/) Cumberland Bridge (1879) Grant Co. OH (http://bridgehunter.

Truss Types Multiple Kingpost braces in compression .

Truss Types Multiple Kingpost braces in compression Multiple Kingpost with Counter Braces counter-braces in tension .

PA ..Burr Arch-Truss (HAER PA-586) Pine Grove Bridge (1884) Chester Co.

.Town Lattice (HAER VT-28) Brown Bridge (1880) Rutland Co.VT .

. OH .Long Truss (HAER OH-122) Eldean Bridge (1860) Miami Co.

. IN .Howe Truss (HAER IN-103) Pine Bluff Bridge (1886) Putnam Co.

Twenty Surviving Smith Trusses (1868-1879) CA (1) PA (1) IN(6) OH (12) Type 2 (2) Type 3 (10) Type 4 (8) .

Smith Truss Patents & Types Type 1 1867 patent Type 2 1869 patent .

Smith Truss Characteristics Type 1 1867 patent • • • • • • • • No iron members Timber tension members Few or no vertical members Compression diagonals inclined at ~45°. 7”x11”) Compression diagonals bear against tension diagonals Requires independent planes of diagonals Critical tension diagonal to chord connection . Tension at ~60° Large diagonal timbers (e.g.

lower chord dia nsi go on na l ten sio n dia go nal n sio es l pr a m gon co dia n sio res l mp na co diago te Typical Connection upper chord .

Smith Truss: Type 2 sio n diag ona l ten tens ion n sio es l pr a m gon co dia com ion s s pre l a n go a i d upper chord dia go nal upper chord .

Smith Truss: Type 2 sio n diag ona l ten tens ion n sio es l pr a m gon co dia com ion s s pre l a n go a i d upper chord dia go nal upper chord .

co mp dia ress go ion nal Smith Truss: Type 2 upper chord n io l ns na te ago di inner plane of diagonals outer plane of diagonals lower chord lower chord .

Smith Truss: Types 3 & 4 Type 3: 3 chord timbers upper chord inner plane of diagonals outer plane of diagonals lower chord .

Smith Truss: Types 3 & 4 Type 3: 3 chord timbers Type 4: 4 chord timbers upper chord inner plane of diagonals upper chord outer plane of diagonals inner plane of diagonals outer plane of diagonals lower chord lower chord center plane of diagonals .

Twenty Surviving Smith Trusses (1868-1879) 200 60 55 4 44 160 4 4 Span (ft) 140 120 3 3 3 2 3 80 3 2 60 40 1865 3 30 25 20 3 1870 45 35 3 3 4 4 40 3 100 50 4 15 Year 1875 1880 Span (m) 180 .

Twenty Surviving Smith Trusses (1868-1879) 200 60 55 4 44 160 4 Span (ft) 4 140 Kidd’s Mill 120 2 3 3 2 60 40 1865 3 3 3 45 40 30 25 20 3 1870 4 35 3 80 4 3 3 Rinard 3 100 50 4 15 Year 1875 1880 Span (m) 180 .

1876 .Type 2 (2) Type 3 (10) Type 4 (8) Kidd’s Mill Bridge Type 2. 1868 Rinard Bridge Type 3.

2m .Kidd’s Mill Bridge (1868. Type 2) 118’-10” = 36.

2m . Type 2) (HAER PA-622) 118’-10” = 36.Kidd’s Mill Bridge (1868.

OH Historical Society ) .Rinard Bridge (1876. Type 3) 1933 photo 130’-2” = 39.67m (Washington Co.

Rinard Bridge (1876. Type 3) 130’-2” = 39.67m .

67m . Type 3) 130’-2” = 39.Rinard Bridge (1876.

Structural Analysis Details • Loads • • • • Truss self-weight Additional dead load Uniform live load (65 psf. ~0.5 k/ft per truss) Concentrated live load (10t vehicle. 5t per truss) • Allowable stresses of 800 psi axial and bending • Linear elastic truss analysis • • • Member forces and stresses Deflections & Camber Connection forces .

Kidd’s Mill Bridge Truss Model U1 U2 L1 U3 L2 U4 L3 U5 L4 U6 L5 U8 U7 L6 L7 U10 U9 L8 L9 L10 for calculation of member forces rigid offset pin or moment release moment release rigid offset U11 U12 L11 .

Kidd’s Mill Bridge: Dead Load 11 in 7 in Diagonals vary in width Axial compression tension 11 in .

Kidd’s Mill Bridge: Dead Load 180 psi Axial compression tension Bending 50 psi compression side .

Kidd’s Mill Bridge: Uniform Live Load 360 psi Axial compression tension Bending 200 psi compression side .

Kidd’s Mill Bridge Maximum Chord Stresses at Midspan (psi) Dead Live Total Axial 180 360 540 Bending 50 200 250 Total 230 560 790 psi Allowable Stress ≈ 800 psi .

Rinard Bridge: Axial Forces 150 psi Dead Load 90 psi compression tension Live Load “compression” diagonal in tension .

Rinard Bridge: Influence Lines .

Deflections & Camber u h camber l L Camber depends on u = upper panel spacing l = lower panel spacing h = truss height L = span .

5 in camber = 6.75 ft Deflections due to in Dead Load 0.Rinard Bridge: Deflections & Camber u = 126.0 Concentrated Live Load 0.5 Uniform Live Load 1.6 in L = 128.3 .0 in h= 181 in l = 125.

n sio al ten gon dia co mp dia ress go ion nal Connection Analysis n o i ss l e r na p m ago o c di lower chord n io l ns na te ago di lower chord Kidd’s Mill Bridge .

. OH .Connection Analysis vertical tension rod repair failed shoulder in vertical tension member Hune Bridge (1879) Washington Co.

Connection Analysis missing ends of vertical tension members (HAER OH-122) Eldean Bridge (1860) Miami Co. OH ..

Connection Analysis tension force n sio al ten gon dia n o i ss l e r na p m ago o c di lower chord lower chord normal force friction force cleavage or splitting crack Kidd’s Mill Bridge .

Connection Analysis: Kidd’s Mill Bridge tension force lower chord Failure Modes considered: Direct tension Shear of shoulders Bearing on shoulders Bearing on chord normal force friction force cleavage or splitting crack .

Connection Analysis tension force Fishplate Splice tension force lower chord normal force friction force friction force cleavage or splitting crack tension force Hune Bridge (1879) Washington Co.. OH .

gov/pictures/collection/hh/item/oh1983/ . PA-645 http://www. OH-130 http://www.loc.More Info Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) reports: Structural Study of Smith Trusses.gov/pictures/collection/hh/item/pa3990/ Rinard Bridge.loc.loc. PA-622 http://www.gov/pictures/collection/hh/item/pa4109/ Kidd’s Mill Bridge.