LAB #1: RESEARCH

ENGR 498 Structural Analysis

Fall 2020

Lab Section 0007

September 11, 2020

The author listed below affirm that I conducted this experiment and prepared this technical
report to the absolute best of my abilities. The author understand that I am preparing to become a
practicing engineer meaning that I take manners of plagiarism and falsification of data very
seriously, and I affirm that this submitted report does not contain any plagiarized content or
falsified information.

Author #1: Catherine Beck

Signature: _________________________________

Contributions: Abstract, Introduction, Procedure, Results, Discussion, Summary and Conclusion,

Reference, Appendix
ABSTRACT

The following report focuses on the background research of the Linville Creek Bridge in

Broadway, VA. The goal of this part of the project was to discover relevant historical background

information of the truss bridge, estimate the length of the structural members, determine the

connections of the truss, create an idealized sketch of the structure, and calculate internal and

reactionary forces undergoing a point loading condition. The expected results will show the type

of tributary loading the bridge is under and the internal and reactionary forces of each truss

member. Members of the truss were found to be in tension or compression with a specific point

loading scenario.

INTRODUCTION

Structures are everywhere. In the Shenandoah Valley there are many historical structures,

specifically a truss bridge located in Broadway, Virginia that was built to span a creek. By reading

this report, relevant background and technical information will be provided along with numerical

results regarding the loading condition that is acting on the Linville Creek Bridge.

In order to properly evaluate the bridge, research was done to gain an understanding of the

history of the structure, a site visit was conducted to make observations, idealization to determine

structural determinacy and tributary loading, and statics was used to determine the internal forces

of each member in the truss.

Tributary loading was determined by using Equation 1.

𝐿2
>< 2 Equation 1
𝐿1
 Where 𝐿2 is the length of the long span and 𝐿1 is the length of the short span. If the results

are greater than 2, then the structure has one-way slab loading. If the results are less than 2, then

the structure has two-way slab loading. A sample calculation can be seen in Sample Calculation

SC 1.

A structure is statically determinate or statically indeterminate by using Equation 2 or

Equation 3, respectively.

𝑏 + 𝑟 = 2𝑗 Equation 2

𝑏 + 𝑟 > 2𝑗 Equation 3

Where 𝑏 represents the number of bars/members in the truss, 𝑟 represents the number of

external reaction forces, and 𝑗 represents the number of joints in the truss. A sample calculation

can be seen in Sample Calculations SC 2 and Sample Calculations SC 3.

The length of diagonal members within the truss were determined by Equation 4.

𝑥 = √𝑎2 + 𝑏2 Equation 4

Where 𝑥 is the length of the diagonal member, 𝑎 is the length of one side of the triangle,

and 𝑏 is the length of the second side of the triangle. A sample calculation can be seen in Sample

Calculations SC 4.

Trigonometry was used to calculate the angle between two members in the truss and can

be seen in Equation 5.

𝑂
𝑡𝑎𝑛−1 (𝐴) = 𝜃 Equation 5
 Where 𝑂 represents the length of the member opposite of the angle being calculated, 𝐴

represents the length of the member adjacent to the angle being calculated, and 𝜃 (or another letter

denoted specifically) represents the angle. A sample calculation can be seen in Sample

Calculation SC 5.

Equilibrium equations were used to determine the internal forces and reaction forces of the

truss, seen in Equation 6, Equation 7, and Equation 8.

↑ Σ𝐹𝑥 = 0 Equation 6

→ Σ𝐹𝑦 = 0 Equation 7

↻ Σ𝑀 = 0 Equation 8

Equation 8 was not used during the method of joints procedure. A sample calculation of

Equation 6, Equation 7, and Equation 8 can be found in Sample Calculation SC 6.

PROCEDURE

The first step in this project was to complete background research on the Linville Creek

Bridge located in Broadway, Virginia, adjacent to highway VA 1421. “Linville Creek Bridge

history” was entered into a Google search bar. A variety of websites containing information about

the history of the bridge was found. These documents were reviewed, and any valuable information

was noted. Since everything cannot be found online, the Town of Broadway and the Virginia

Department of Transportation were contacted for more information. Kyle O’Brien, the town

manager for the Town of Broadway was specifically contacted since the bridge is owned by

Broadway, Virginia. Jessica Baska, a bridge engineer for VDOT, was referred by Burgess Lindsey,
also from VDOT. Jessica Baska was able to provide information regarding the change of loading

factors and retrofitting.

A site visit was also conducted to collect observations and measurements. Not all students

were able to attend for various reasons, however, information within the class was shared via

GroupMe and Canvas. Online resources were also used to obtain a better visual of the bridge and

specific aspects like the truss, beams, and girders. Measurements were made by students suing a

25-foot tape measure and recorded in a notebook.

The next step in this project was to create a two-dimensional profile of the truss (Figure

1). This was created by reviewing a photo taken by Jamie Clark (Figure 2), a student, and photos

online (Figure 3 and Figure 4). The measurements for the profile were determined during the site

visit and additional online research. After creating a two-dimensional profile, an idealization of

the structure was developed (Figure 5). This idealization was done on engineering graph paper

using proper notation. Black boxes represent nodes and lines represent members. An idealization

of the beams and girders under the bridge deck (Figure 6) was also created to assist in determining

the tributary loading. The measurements for the spacing of the beams were determined by students

on site and with additional online research.

Then, the determinacy of the truss needed to be determined. Guidance was received from

Dr. Daniel Castaneda and Dr. Heather Kirkvold during this step because this truss is unique since

it violates one of the truss rules. Due to this violation, an assumption was made to be able to

determine if the structure was statically determinate or statically indeterminate. In Figure 5,

members NR, RS, and LS are considered supports to help resist buckling. This assumption means

the members do not exist in the truss. Static determinacy was determined by counting the number
of bars/members (denoted by “b”), number of joints (denoted by “j”), and number of external

reactions (denoted by “r”).

Finally, the internal forces and reactionary forces of each member was calculated using

statics and method of joints. In order to be able to solve for each of the internal forces and

reactionary force, another assumption was made. Two more members (members CM and GM in

Figure 5) must be removed to have a truss that is statically determinate. Members CM and GM

were so thin that they can only carry tensile force.

The truss was looked at as a whole to determine the reactionary forces at points A and I

before looking at individual joints (Figure 7). Then, four members were deemed to be zero force

members (ZFMs). This was determined using prior statics knowledge. The internal forces of the

members at joint A (Figure 8) were calculated first because there were the least number of

unknowns. Calculations at joint B(Figure 9) followed, then joint C (Figure 10), joint P (Figure

11), joint O (Figure 12), joint N (Figure 13), joint D (Figure 14), and finally joint E (Figure 15).

Only half of the truss was calculated because the truss is symmetrical which indicates that the

members on the other side will have the same internal forces.

RESULTS

The result of the determinacy of the truss was first statically indeterminate to the second

degree (seen in Sample Calculations SC 3) and then statically determinate before solving for the

internal and reactionary forces (seen in Sample Calculations SC 2). Tributary loading was one-

way loading. A sample calculation for this result can be seen in Sample Calculations SC 1.

Furthermore, Table 1 shows the result of the internal forces for each member in the truss.
DISCUSSION

The engineer of record for the Linville Creek Bridge (Rockingham County Structure No.

6154) is Edwin Thacher. Thacher attended Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute for civil engineering

and graduated in 1863 with high honors. Thacher had a 40-year long career in bridge engineering.

During those 40 years, he had eight bridge related patents (including the Thacher Truss) and

designed over 2,000 steel and 200 concrete bridges. [1]

The motivating reason to build the truss bridge in this specific location was to replace the

wire footbridge that was washed away on September 29, 1896 from flooding. The public believed

this a wagon bridge was a public necessity due to the fact that the creek is dangerous to cross. [1]

Changing loading factors from the 1890s to today has affected the bridge’s use today.

According to Jessica Baska, a bridge engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation, the

bridge was designed for loads that no longer exist. Since the bridge is restricted to 4 tons [2]

modern day delivery trucks that have five axels (assuming it is an 18-wheeler) cannot be supported

by the bridge because they weight on average 15 tons [3].

The historical significance of the Linville Creek Bridge is that it is a rare surviving truss

bridge with metal pin-connections [1]. There are only two in the United States that still exist,

according to Jessica Baska. This bridge is also made up of the Thacher Truss, patented on My 31,

1881. It allows for an array of configurations to suit different bridge requirements due to its rare

combination of triangular and suspension systems [1].

No retrofits needed to be done on the Linville Creek Bridge. Kyle O’Brien, the town

manager for the Town of Broadway, stated that it does not make sense to upgrade a bridge that is
not safe for traffic to use as a single lane bridge. Jessica Baska also mentioned that members would

need to be replaced in order for the bridge to carry modern day vehicle weight. The vehicles used

on this bridge in the 1890s no longer exist. Also, retrofits are typically not done on pedestrian

bridges due to the fact that if the bridge were to fail structurally, it would not be caused by the

pedestrians. It would require four tons of people running asynchronously at 50 miles per hour.

Factors that are considered when retrofitting any bridge is the amount of damage caused

by fatigue from former vehicle loads crossing the bridge and the bridge’s remaining fatigue life.

The magnitude of damage that is a result of unexpected actions is also taken into consideration [4].

Social constrains are social behaviors and attributes of a community that influence the

sustainability of a design project. Such patterns of behavior can include formal practices (i.e.

government regulations) or informal norms (i.e. cultural preferences) that can provide constraints

for the implementation of a project. Unsustainable projects are caused by incorrect identification

and inclusion of social constraints. [5]

Not all of the members in the truss are truly pin-connected. There are two fixed connections

in the truss (members DM and FM (seen in Figure 5). This is a violation of truss rules (all members

must be pin-pin connected, all members must carry axial force, and forces can only occur at nodes).

The connections at the abutments initially appear to be pin-connections on both ends.

However, only one is a pin-connection and the other is a roller-connection. This makes sense

because one support must allow for movement in the x-direction. If both connections at the

abutments were rollers, the bridge would not be stable. If both connections at the abutments were

pins, the structure would not be able to move appropriately at live load varies.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Research, a site visit, idealizations, and calculations were done to fully understand the

background and structural embodiment of the Linville Creek Bridge located in Broadway,

Virginia, adjacent to highway VA 1421. Since knowledge is still being acquired, necessary

assumptions were made to obtain results about the internal forces of each member making up the

truss. It is recommended that background research is done online and offline. The internet does

not have all of the answers and sometimes the best answer is from someone who works in the field

of interest. Be sure to communicate with everyone involved in the project. Collaboration will only

help an individual succeed.

REFERENCES

[1] “Photographs Written Historical and Descriptive Data.” .

[2] A. B. Miller, K. M. Clark, and M. C. Grimes, “Final Report A Management Plan for Historic

Bridges in Virginia.” Jan-2001.

[3] T. Waldron, “Overloaded Trucks,” Maryland Personal Injury Lawyer, 01-Sep-2020.

[Online]. Available: https://www.millerandzois.com/weight-tractor-

trailer.html#:~:text=The average empty tractor trailer, and 8-9 feet wide. [Accessed: 12-

Sep-2020].

[4] R. Dissanayake and C. S. Bandara, “Retrofitting of damaged bridges – the sustainable

solution.” 16-Feb-2016.

[5] A. Wood, P. F. Garff, C. J. Ward, E. C. Dahlin, and R. S. Lewis, “Social Constraints: A

Critical Component of Global Humanitarian-based Projects.” American Society for

Engineering Education, 2013. [6] “Linville Creek Bridge,” Linville Creek Bridge -

HistoricBridges.org. [Online]. Available:

https://historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/?bridgebrowser=virginia/linvillecreekbridge/.

[Accessed: 12-Sep-2020].
APPENDIX
Table 1: Results of the internal and reactionary forces of the truss
Member Internal Force (kip) Tension or Compression
Iy 3.5 Tension
Ay 3.5 Tension
Ax 0 N/A
AP and IJ 4.26 Tension
AB and HI 2.43 Compression
BP and HJ 1 Tension
BC and GH 2.43 Compression
CP and GJ 1.22 Tension
CD and GF 1.73 Compression
DP and FJ 3.43 Compression
OP and JK 4.5 Tension
NO and KL 4.5 Tension
MN and LM 4.5 Tension
DM and FM 3.65 Tension
DE and EF 6.6 Compression
EM 1 Tension
CO, DN, FL, and GK Zero force members N/A

Figure 1: Two-dimensional profile of the truss bridge

(Height of the bridge was researched [1])
Figure 2: Linville Creek Bridge taken by Jamie Clark

Figure 3: Panoramic of Linville Creek Bridge [6]

 Figure 4: Linville Creek Bridge [6]

Figure 5: Idealization of the truss bridge

(*Note: lines in black represent the metal truss members, lines in orange represent cables, lines
in pink represent the cables assumed to be bracing cables, lines in purple represent cables that
were disregarded from the structure during static calculations)
 Figure 6: Idealization of beams and girders underneath bridge deck
(*Note: lines in black represent beams, lines in orange represent girders)
(The distance between the beams was researched [1])

Figure 7: Truss as a whole to determine the reactionary forces at points A and I

Figure 8: Joint A method of joints Figure 9: Joint B method of joints

 Figure 10: Joint C method of joints Figure 11: Joint P method of joints

Figure 12: Joint O method of joints Figure 13: Joint N method of joints

Figure 14: Joint D method of joints Figure 15: Joint E method of joints

Sample Calculations (SC)

𝐿 16.7 𝑓𝑡
SC 1: Tributary loading: 𝐿2 >< 2 → = 8.35 > 2
1 2 𝑓𝑡

SC 2: Statically determinate

After removing members CM and GM: 𝑏 + 𝑟 = 2 → 29 + 3 > (2)(16) → 32 = 32

SC3: Statically indeterminate

After removing members NR, RS, and LS: 𝑏 + 𝑟 = 2 → 31 + 3 > (2)(16) → 34 > 32

SC 4: Length of diagonal members:

 Members DP, FJ, CM, and GM: 𝑥 = √𝑎2 + 𝑏2 = √(33.4 𝑓𝑡)2 + (24 𝑓𝑡)2 = 41.1 𝑓𝑡

Members AP, IJ, CP, GJ, DM, and FM: 𝑥 = √𝑎2 + 𝑏2 = √(16.7 𝑓𝑡)2 + (24 𝑓𝑡)2 =
29.2 𝑓𝑡

Members NR and LS: 𝑥 = √𝑎2 + 𝑏 2 =√(8.35 𝑓𝑡)2 + (12 𝑓𝑡)2 = 14.6 𝑓𝑡

SC 5: Angles in truss:
𝑂 24 𝑓𝑡
𝛼 = 𝑡𝑎𝑛−1 (𝐴) = 𝑡𝑎𝑛−1 (16.7 𝑓𝑡) = 55.2°

𝑂 24 𝑓𝑡
𝛾 = 𝑡𝑎𝑛−1 (𝐴) = 𝑡𝑎𝑛−1 (33.4 𝑓𝑡) = 35.7°

𝛽 = 180° − (90° + 𝛼 ) = 34.8°

SC 6: Internal and reactionary forces:

Whole truss:

→ Σ𝐹𝑥 = 0: 𝐴𝑥 = 0

↑ Σ𝐹𝑦 = 0: 𝐴𝑦 − 7 𝑘𝑖𝑝 + 𝐼𝑦 = 0

133.6 𝑓𝑡
↻ Σ𝑀𝐴 = 0: (7 𝑘𝑖𝑝) ( ) − 𝐼𝑦 (133.6 𝑓𝑡) = 0
2

133.6 𝑓𝑡
(7 𝑘𝑖𝑝)( )
2
𝐼𝑦 = (133.6 𝑓𝑡)
= 3.5 𝑘𝑖𝑝

𝐴𝑦 = 7 𝑘𝑖𝑝 − 𝐼𝑦 = 7 𝑘𝑖𝑝 − 3.5 𝑘𝑖𝑝 = 3.5 𝑘𝑖𝑝

Joint A:

→ Σ𝐹𝑥 = 0: 𝐴𝐵 + 𝐴𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝛼) = 0

↑ Σ𝐹𝑦 = 0: 𝐴𝑦 + 𝐴𝑃𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛼) = 0
𝐴𝑦 3.5 𝑘𝑖𝑝
𝐴𝑃 = sin (𝛼) = sin(55.2°) = 4.26 𝑘𝑖𝑝

𝐴𝐵 = −𝐴𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝛼 ) = −(4.26 𝑘𝑖𝑝) cos(55.2°) = −2.43 𝑘𝑖𝑝

Joint B:

→ Σ𝐹𝑥 = 0: − 𝐴𝐵 + 𝐵𝐶 = 0

↑ Σ𝐹𝑦 = 0: 𝐵𝑃 − 1 𝑘𝑖𝑝 = 0

𝐵𝑃 = 1 𝑘𝑖𝑝

𝐵𝐶 = 𝐴𝐵 = −2.43 𝑘𝑖𝑝
Joint C:

→ Σ𝐹𝑥 = 0: − 𝐵𝐶 − 𝐶𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝛼 ) + 𝐶𝐷 = 0

↑ Σ𝐹𝑦 = 0: 𝐶𝑃𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛼 ) − 1 𝑘𝑖𝑝 = 0

1 𝑘𝑖𝑝 1 𝑘𝑖𝑝
𝐶𝑃 = 𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛼) = 𝑠𝑖𝑛(55.2°) = 1.22 𝑘𝑖𝑝

𝐶𝐷 = 𝐵𝐶 + 𝐶𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑑(𝛼 ) = −2.43 𝑘𝑖𝑝 + (1.22 𝑘𝑖𝑝) cos(55.2°) =

−1.73 𝑘𝑖𝑝

Joint P:

→ Σ𝐹𝑥 = 0: − 𝐴𝑃𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛽) + 𝐶𝑃𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛽) + 𝐷𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝛾) + 𝑂𝑃 = 0

↑ Σ𝐹𝑦 = 0: − 𝐵𝑃 − 𝐶𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝛽) − 𝐷𝑃𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛾) = 0

−𝐵𝑃−𝐶𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝛽) −(1 𝑘𝑖𝑝)−(1.22 𝑘𝑖𝑝)𝑐𝑜𝑠(34.8°)

𝐷𝑃 = sin(𝛾)
= sin(35.7°)
= −3.43 𝑘𝑖𝑝

𝑂𝑃 = 𝐴𝑃𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛽) − 𝐶𝑃𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛽) − 𝐷𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝛾 ) = (4.26 𝑘𝑖𝑝) sin(34.8°) −

(1.22 𝑘𝑖𝑝) sin(34.8°) − (−3.43 𝑘𝑖𝑝) cos(35.7°) = 4.5 𝑘𝑖𝑝

Joint O:

→ Σ𝐹𝑥 = 0: − 𝑂𝑃 + 𝑁𝑂 = 0

𝑁𝑂 = 𝑂𝑃 = 4.5 𝑘𝑖𝑝

Joint N:

→ Σ𝐹𝑥 = 0: − 𝑁𝑂 + 𝑀𝑁 = 0

𝑀𝑁 = 𝑁𝑂 = 4.5 𝑘𝑖𝑝

Joint D:

→ Σ𝐹𝑥 = 0: −𝐶𝐷 − 𝐷𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝛾 ) + 𝐷𝑀𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝛼 ) + 𝐷𝐸 = 0

↑ Σ𝐹𝑦 = 0: 𝐷𝑃𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛾 ) + 𝐷𝑀𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛼 ) − 1 𝑘𝑖𝑝 = 0

−𝐷𝑃𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛾 ) + 1 𝑘𝑖𝑝 −(−3.43 𝑘𝑖𝑝)𝑠𝑖𝑛(35.7°) + 1 𝑘𝑖𝑝

𝐷𝑀 = =
𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛼 ) 𝑠𝑖𝑛(55.2°)
= 3.65 𝑘𝑖𝑝

𝐷𝐸 = 𝐶𝐷 + 𝐷𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝛾 ) − 𝐷𝑀𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝛼 )
= −1.73 𝑘𝑖𝑝 + (−3.43 𝑘𝑖𝑝) cos(35.7°)
− (3.43 𝑘𝑖𝑝) cos(55.2°) = −6.6 𝑘𝑖𝑝
Joint E:

→ Σ𝐹𝑥 = 0: −𝐷𝐸 + 𝐸𝐹 = 0

↑ Σ𝐹𝑦 = 0: 𝐸𝑀 − 1 𝑘𝑖𝑝 = 0

𝐸𝐹 = 𝐷𝐸 = −6.6 𝑘𝑖𝑝

𝐸𝑀 = 1 𝑘𝑖𝑝