Truss Through Tied Arch Bridge Building Challenge

Arch-itects

Macomb Mathematics, Science, and Technology Center

Matthew Butkowski, Jack Loring, Evan Tarian

Mr. McMillan
 Table of Contents

Summary……………………………………………………………………………………….3

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………….4

Bridge Creation………………………………………………………………………………..5

Scientific Principles of Truss Through Tied Arch Bridge…………………………………..5

Design……………………………………………………………………………………….….6

Data and Calculations………………………………………………………………………....7

ModelSmart Testing…....……………………………………………………………………...7

Sample Calculation……………………………………………………………………………10

Bentley Drawing………………………………………………………………………………..11

Drawings and Pictures…………………………………………………………………..…….12

Design Improvements, Testing, and Precautions………………………………………….16

1
Challenges……………………………………………………………………………………..16

Precaution……………………………………………………………………………………...17

Conclusion/Recommendations……………………………………………………………....18

Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………....…...20

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………....21

Appendix…………………………………………………………………….………………….23

2
 Summary

When first designing the bridge, we used ModelSmart 2D to create truss designs,

and to test the strengths of the trusses to choose what design we would use. After

testing them, the software gave us both the bridge weight, as well as how much the

bridge held. We repeated this a few times each with separate designs. We calculated

the strength to weight ratio of each design modeled. We then analyzed that data to see

which of the designs had the greatest ratio. The truss with the best ratio was then

recreated using the Bentley software, and the arch of the bridge was added to it. Once

each part had been designed in Bentley, they were then constructed to scale with the

balsa wood, string, and wood glue provided by the competition. The arches that we

created required additional work, forming and reforming so that they would be as

identical as possible. The actual trusses were two inches starting at the edge and were

decreased to a one inch width toward the middle. After each individual piece was made

they were connected to form our bridge.

3
 Introduction

We are the Arch-itects. We chose this name because it incorporates arches

which are crucial part of this challenge and also names architects which is the role that

we are playing by designing this bridge. The first of the three team members is Matthew

Butkowski a 16 year old gamer, geek, nerd, and overall oddball. Jack Loring is 16 and

loves to play sports, including baseball, football, and golf. Evan, the team captain, is 17,

an avid sports fan, and aspires to attend the University of Michigan. We are all from the

St. Clair Shores area, with two of us attending Lake Shore High School (Evan and Matt)

in addition to the Macomb Mathematics, Science, and Technology Center (MMSTC),

and one of us attending Cousino High School (Jack), as well as MMSTC.

4
 Bridge Creation

Scientific Principles of Truss Through Tied Arch Bridge

Truss through tied arch bridges are bridges that use an effective combination of

through trusses and tied arches. Truss through tied arch bridges use a continuous

beam design because of continuous beams great resistance to bending. The

continuous beam is the platform that is used to cross the bridge. The beam is often

reinforced with trusses. These trusses are designed with triangles, the strongest

geometrical shape, in order to maximize strength while minimizing the weight of the

bridge. The truss portion of the bridge either uses a Pratt webbing or a Warren webbing.

Pratt webbing is characterized by having diagonals slanted toward the middle of the

bridge. Warren webbing is characterized by a series of isosceles triangles or equilateral

triangles. Either of these two are chosen due to both providing the bridge with great

support. Lastly, the bridge is completed with a tied arch. The arch spans over the top of

the bridge and is tied down to the platform to provide tension when the bridge is being

stressed.

Figure 1. Force Diagram of Arches

5
 Figure 1, above, shows how a load on the bridge is distributed from the deck to

the ties and then through the arch. With the forces being distributed throughout the arch

it is important to have arches that will be able to hold the weight of the load.

Design

When first creating the bridge, we took into account many different structural

bridge designs which were found online and first attempted to create bridges similar to

those designs. At first, there was some trouble understanding how the ModelSmart

program worked. Certain things we attempted to do did not work since we did not have

previous familiarity with the software. However, with more experience on the software,

this problem was solved quite easily within the first day of designing. Similar problems

occurred once the use of the MicroStation PowerDraft software started. The given video

tutorials were a large aid in completing the sheet. The videos did not happen to show

how to accurately design and create an arch. Due to this, creating the arch took longer

than expected. The arch ended up being somewhat easy to create once the software’s

features were fully understood. While attempting these designs, an altered version of a

Viga Howe type truss was created and, after testing, had the best strength to weight

ratio. The arch design is the same as that of the truss design (Viga Howe) only

formatted to fit into the arch.

6
 Data and Calculations

ModelSmart Testing

Figure 2, Town Lattice Truss

Figure 2 illustrates another of our preliminary designs, a Town Lattice Truss. This

design worked very well, and was considered as our best design (and the one we would

go with) until our final design.

7
Figure 3, K Design Truss

The K Design Truss shown in Figure 3 performed much better than the X Design,

but was still not as good as the Town Lattice Truss (the best at the time).

Figure 4, Howe Truss

Figure 4 shows our final bridge design, and the one we went with when

constructing our bridge. It out-performed the Town Lattice Truss with a better ratio, and

was ultimately chosen as our final design.

8
Table 1. Truss Design Test Data
Kind of Height Distance Weight Breaking Ratio
Truss (inches) Between (grams) Load
Truss (pounds)
(inches)

Pratt
Webbing 2 2 4.188 6.163 668.10

Pratt
Webbing
with Vertical
Supports 2 2 4.976 7.06 644.14

Town
Lattice
Truss 4 2 5.458 10.112 841.12

X-Design 2 2 5.262 5.688 490.75

K Design 4 2 6.408 9.438 668.67

Howe 2 2 4.547 8.617 860.37

Table 1, above, displays the the results of our data calculations from the testing

of the trusses. The table shows the weight in grams of the test piece in grams, the

breaking weight of the test in pounds, and the strength to weight ratio of the resulting

trials. The truss design that performed the best was the Howe truss design having a

strength to weight ratio of 860.37. The strength to weight ratio is calculated by

converting the breaking weight of the bridge into grams and then dividing it by the

weight of the bridge in grams. The other truss designs that were given consideration

include the town lattice truss and the K design. Ultimately, the Howe truss was chosen

because it had the highest strength to weight ratio according to the ModelSmart

software and was believed to cause the fewest construction difficulties. The bridge that

9
we constructed held 23,872.3 grams and weighed 40.5 grams. This means that the

bridges strength to weight ratio is 589.44.

Sample Calculation

Weight held by bridge

Figure 8, above, displays the calculation of the bridges strength. To calculate take the

weight held by the bridge, 23,872 grams, and divide it by the weight of the bridge, 40.5 grams,

to get the strength to weight ratio, 589.44. These are the results from the testing of our actual

bridge.

10
 Bentley Drawing

Figure 555. MicroStation PowerDraft Bridge Design

The above figure depicts the preliminary and final design of the constructed truss

through tied arch bridge. Nothing was changed between the preliminary and final

designs, so the same sheet was used. The top left of the sheet shows a side view of the

bridge. Labeled are the dimensions of each different length and angle measurement.

The top right shows an end point view, as if looking inside the bridge, also showing

labeled lengths and angles. The bottom left shows an aerial view, as if looking down

from inside a plane. Dimensions on the sheet are done in inches and show the actual

measurements of the physical bridge. The sheet is dimensioned so for every labeled

five inches on the paper, if measured with a ruler, would equal one inch. The full length

of the bridge extends to 18 inches. The width was made out to be three inches. The

arches themselves were approximately four and three eighths inches tall and the height

of the truss portion was approximately two and 63 hundredths. With these

measurements, the bridge had a total height just slightly over seven inches.

11
 Drawings and Pictures

Figure 6. Construction of trusses

Figure 6, above, shows part the piecing together of the trusses. The beams that

you see in the picture are going to be used to connect the two trusses. Once connected

that the truss will have been glued to the road.

Figure 7. Completed Road

12
 Figure 7, above, shows the road in the process of drying and will later be flipped

over from the view now and connected to the truss, as stated in the previous picture. On

both sides of the sticks that run horizontal is are long sticks running vertically as well as

the diagonal pieces.

Figure 8. Bended Arches

Figure 8, above, shows the arches that were created as they are removed from

being pinned to the cardboard. These arches are not including one of our arches. These

arches will later be connected by trusses.

13
Figure 9. Completed Arches and Bottom Half of Bridge

Figure 9, above, shows the arches with trusses in between, but the arches are

not connected to the bridge road, and they are not connected together.

Figure 10. Bridge without Suspension

Figure 10, above, shows the arches and truss connected the arches are

connected to one another and are held by way of zip ties.

14
Figure 11. Tying the Arches to the Bridge

Figure 11, above, shows one of our group members, Jack, tying the arches to

the bridge for extra support. Also, the strings we were using were braided to add

strength to them.

15
 Design Improvements, Testing, and Precautions

The designs that were used, both preliminary and final, were tested using the

ModelSmart software to approximate about how much weight they would hold. With

each test, we attempted to add or remove parts of the wood we thought would either

improve the bridge’s ratio and/or remove parts we thought were unnecessary.

Eventually, these improvements led to several designs which were modifications from

their originals but had the best strength to weight ratio. From these “final” designs, we

then chose the design with the best ratio to use and attempt to build. Additionally, when

designing the bridges on a computer, we attempted to make designs that were not

overly complex, so that the building of the bridge would be completed on schedule and

before the deadline.

Challenges

Once the final design was decided upon, the building of the bridge had begun,

which of course presented it’s own challenges. Among these problems, the two most

significant was when the bridge broke during early stages of construction, and that the

arches of the bridge were also uncooperative when trying to create them. The bridge

first broke while trying to undo part of the construction that wasn’t quite right.

Unfortunately, half of the truss broke while trying to fix this problem, and that truss had

to be redone. This was accomplished though within the same day, since it happened

early on during the time that had been scheduled to build. The arches were not as much

of a problem when building them, but more so as just time consuming to create, as they

first had to be soaked in water for nearly an hour to be able to bend the desired way,

and then to keep them in that shape they had to be pinned to cardboard in the position

16
that we wanted (so as to be stiff in that position), which took another length of time.

Additionally, one of the wood sticks used to form the arch did break during the process,

and that final part for the arch needed to be redone. Finally, a level fell on the bridge

during the final stages of construction and due to time constraints, the damage done to

the bridge was unable to be fully repaired other than the addition of more glue to the

damaged parts. This may have led to a worse strength to weight ratio than was

anticipated.

Precautions

While building the bridge, we had no safety precautions other than elementary

safety precautions. These included being careful when handling the equipment

(scissors to cut wood, being careful when gluing pieces of the bridge together etc.), as

well as the handling of the bridge itself, being sure not to accidentally destroy it by some

unintended means. Even with these precautions, there were times the bridge either

broke or did not stick well together. This is likely due to the continuation of work on the

bridge while parts of it which had been glued were still drying, thus those parts of the

bridge were weaker at the points the bridge was broken.

17
 Conclusion/Recommendations

Conclusion

To conclude, we believe our project is successful due to the strength to weight

ratio of the bridge. The constructed model bridge being dimensioned properly, therefore,

should work in the same way that the digitally constructed bridge worked. With this in

mind, the constructed bridge should be able to hold as much weight, if not more, than

what was predicted using the ModelSmart software. By taking part in this experiment,

each of us learned a number of things. First, we learned how to use two new types of

software for bridge constructing purposes, those being ModelSmart 2D and the Bentley

MicroStation PowerDraft V8I (SELECTseries 4) software. Additionally, the group

learned the scientific and physics-related principles of bridge construction through the

research that was done in finding a proper design for the bridge and the actual

construction of the bridge. The group found out about the strengths of different truss

designs, and what type of supports the most weight.

Recommendations/Further Improvements

If given the chance to do the project over again, we would attempt to make all the

lengths of the bridge more precise and accurate but this may not be able to be

prevented, because of the imperfections in the wood. Furthermore, we would have

made the trusses on the bridge more compact, as this was a common feature among

the high performing bridges. We would also add to more trusses to the bottom, because

the support is increased and more stability will be provided. Four trusses would be best

because of optimal strength and stability. One more thing we might do to improve is

18
curve the bottom of the trusses slightly to prevent bending and added support to the

trusses.

19
 Acknowledgements

We would like to thank our Statistics teacher, Mrs. Rose Cybulski for showing us

the ModelSmart software, since the software was very useful when digitally

constructing, designing, and testing our bridges. We would also like to thank Mr. Greg

McMillan, our Physics teacher, for providing us with the information we would need in

order to participate in the competition as well as giving us some hints as to how we

should construct the bridge. Finally, we would like to thank each other for sticking to the

plan and for supporting each other to complete the bridge and paper.

20
 Bibliography

"Cantilever Bridge Facts, Design and History." Cantilever Bridge - Types, Facts and

Longest Cantilever Bridges. N.p., 2017. Web. 09 Jan. 2017.

<http://www.historyofbridges.com/facts-about-bridges/cantilever-bridge/>.

Cridlebaugh, Bruce S. "Bridge Basics - A Spotter's Guide to Bridge Design." Bridge

Basics - A Spotter's Guide to Bridge Design. N.p., 03 June 2008. Web. 07 Jan. 2017.

Distefano, Dorothy, and Michelle Arevalo. "What Is Continuous Beam?"

WiseGEEK. Conjecture Corporation, n.d. Web. 07 Jan. 2017.

"How Bridges Work." HowStuffWorks Science. HowStuffWorks, 2017. Web. 09 Jan.

2017. <http://science.howstuffworks.com/engineering/civil/bridge3.htm>.

"How Does a Suspension Bridge Work?" Wonderopolis. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Jan. 2017.

<http://wonderopolis.org/wonder/how-does-a-suspension-bridge-work>.

"THE POINT & PITTSBURGH." Point Bridge. N.p., 17. Web. 9 Jan. 17. <http://point-

bridge.com/about-us/pittsburgh-the-point/>.

"File:Pride Rainbow - Lowry Avenue Bridge, Minneapolis (19218720442).jpg."

Wikimedia Common. N.p., 1 Oct. 16. Web. 9 Jan. 17.

<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pride_Rainbow_-

_Lowry_Avenue_Bridge,_Minneapolis_(19218720442).jpg>.

"Tied-arch Bridge Facts, History and Examples." Tied-arch Bridge - Facts,

Design and Examples of Tied-arch Bridges. History of Bridges, 2017. Web. 07

Jan. 2017.

"Tied-arch Bridges." Steelconstruction.info. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Jan. 2017.

21
 Woodford, Chris. "How Bridges Work." Explain That Stuff. N.p., 26 Mar. 2016. Web.

09 Jan. 2017. <http://www.explainthatstuff.com/bridges.html>.

22
 Appendix

Appendix A

Table 2. Daily Journal

Table 2, above, shows a daily log of each group member’s work on the project

throughout the days that it was being worked on.

23
 Appendix B

Table 3. Daily Schedule

Design Trusses 2-1-17 2-1-17

Construct Road 2-5-17 2-2-17

Construct Trusses 2-5-17 2-3-17

Design Arches 2-9-17 2-9-11

Construct Arches 2-10-17 2-11-17

Put Bridge Together 2-11-17 2-12-17

Complete Paper 2-13-17 2-13-17

Table 3, shown above, gives the day each task was to be finished, and the day

each task was completed. Most all of the tasks were completed on time. The arches

were not completed on time due to the need to wait for them to dry and one of them

breaking, which needed to be redone.

24