FACULTY OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING

SEMESTER 1 2020/2021

NAME OF PROJECT TRUSS BRIDGE

COURSE CODE BFC 21403

COURSE STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

LECTURER’S NAME DR. NORHAFIZAH BINTI SALLEH

SECTION 2

9
GROUP

AINUR RAHMAH BINTI HAMDAN

AF190112

AIRA AQILLA BINTI AB WAHID

AF190056

NUR IMAN EZZATY BINTI MOHD YASIN

GROUP MEMBERS
AF190158

NUR SHUHADAH BINTI JOHARI

AF190134

WANI SAJIDAH BINTI MOHAMAD ZAIN

AF190156

MARKS
 CONTENT

BIL. NO TABLE OF CONTENT PAGES

CHAPTER 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2-3
1.1 INTRODUCTION

1.2 METHOD APPLICATION

CHAPTER 2 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

2.1 Analysis 4 - 18

2.2 Discussion

CHAPTER 3 SUMMARY
19
3.1 CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 4 REFERENCES 20

1
 CHAPTER 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 INTRODUCTION

In civil engineering, a structure can be defined as a system for interconnected members

used for supporting external loads. Essentially, the structural analysis is the prediction of the
response of structures to specified arbitrary external loads. There are many types of civil
engineering structures such as buildings, towers, cables and bridges.

In order to form the structure, members are responsible for interconnecting. The
members can be in different forms and shapes depending on their functional requirement. The
structural members can be classified as beams, columns and tension structures, frames, and
trusses. But in this project, we are required to design a bridge that consists of trusses as the
members.

A truss bridge is a bridge that consists of a series of individual members that act in the
tension or compression and it will perform together as a unit. It is a type of bridge in which the
system of linked elements will form triangular units. The intersection of individual members
of truss bridge will intersect at the truss joints or panel joints.

The connection of members formed the top and bottom truss that is known as the top
and bottom chord while the slope and vertical members that connect the chords collectively is
known as the web truss. Essentially, the truss bridges are used for the construction of road and
road traffic especially when there is an obstacle for the connection of road such as river.

In the construction of the truss bridge, we must analyse the bridge structure by
considering the determinacy of the structure. The structure can either be statically determinate,
statically indeterminate or unstable. This can be determined by calculating the truss members,
joints and number of reactions by using the formula m+r and 2j.

2
1.2 METHOD APPLICATION

Our project is solely about constructing a bridge model. Basically, to test whether the
bridge can withstand the amount of load acted on it and whether it deformed or not which
decide the success of building the bridge. The method used in conducting this project are
researches to collect related data and calculation involving the internal forces reacted on the
bridge. This data are mainly collected by testing on to ensure the bridge model can withstand
particular load being applied to it. The modulus of elasticity of the bridge is also determined
during this project based on data and calculations that has been collected. We also evaluate the
deflection of the bridge and its measurement. Linpro software was also used to obtain few of
the data. We also want to determine whether or not the manual calculation using the linpro
application is different or not.

3
 CHAPTER 2

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

2.1 DATA ANALYSIS

PART 1

A) Layout and Design

J I H G

B C D E
A F

300 mm

150 mm 200 mm 300 mm 200 mm 150 mm

4
B) Determinacy of Structure

Before proceed to calculation, we need to determine the determinacy of structure.

Several information needed which is number of members, m, number of joints, j and number
of reaction forces applied on the structure, r.

number of members, m = 18

number of joints, j = 10

number of reaction forces, r = 3

Next, by comparing m+r and 2j, we will determine either the structure is statically determinate,
statically indeterminate or unstable.

m + r : 2j

18 + 3 : 2(10)

21 > 20

m + r > 2j

Therefore, m + r > 2j shows that the structure is statically indeterminate by 1 degree. A member
should be remove to get statically determinate structure.

m + r : 2j

17 + 3 : 2(10)

20 = 20

m + r = 2j

5
PART 2
Manual calculation
Reactions for 1kN with length in mm
Clockwise ΣMA = 0

= C (350) + D (750) - Fy(F) (1000) = 0

= 1(350) + 1(750) - Fy(F) (1000) = 0

Fy(f) = 1000/1000

Fy(f) = 1 kN

Upward ΣFy = 0

Fy(A) + Fy(F) -1 –1 = 0

Fy(A) + Fy(F) = 2

Fy(F) = 2-1

Fy(F) = 1kN

Load (kN) Load at C, kN Load at D, kN Load at A, kN Load at F, kN

1 -1 -1 1 1
3 -3 -3 3 3

6
Real forces

Virtual forces

7
Calculation for load no.1 (1kN)

Members f(kN) µ(kN) L(mm) fµL µ2 L

AB 0.5 0 150 0 0
BC 0.5 0 200 0 0
CD 1.0 -0.71 300 -213 151.23
DE 0.5 0 200 0 0
EF 0.5 0 150 0 0
FG -1.12 0 335.41 0 0
GH -1.0 0 200 0 0
HI -1.0 -0.71 300 213 151.23
IJ -1.0 0 200 0 0
JA -1.12 0 335.41 0 0
JB 0 0 300 0 0
JC 1.12 0 360.56 0 0
IC 0 -0.71 300 0 151.23
HC 0 1 424.26 0 424.26
HD 0 -0.71 300 0 151.23
GD 1.12 0 360.56 0 0
GE 0 0 300 0 0
Σ= 0 1029.18

𝛴 𝑓µ𝐿
HC =
Σ µ2 L

0
HC =
1029.8

HC = 0

8
Calculation based on software Linpro

Structure, Load Case: CASE1, Units: kN-m

LinPro 2.7 | Enes Siljak | eness@bosnia.ba | www.line.co.ba

Reactions, Comb: CASE1, Units: kN-m

LinPro 2.7 | Enes Siljak | eness@bosnia.ba | www.line.co.ba

Axial Force Diagram, Comb: CASE1, Units: kN-m

LinPro 2.7 | Enes Siljak | eness@bosnia.ba | www.line.co.ba

9
Calculation for load no.2 (3kN)

Members f(kN) µ(kN) L(mm) fµL µ2 L

AB 1.5 0 150 0 0
BC 1.5 0 200 0 0
CD 3.0 -0.71 300 -639.0 151.23
DE 1.5 0 200 0 0
EF 1.5 0 150 0 0
FG -3.35 0 335.41 0 0
GH -3.0 0 200 0 0
HI -3.0 -0.71 300 639.0 151.23
IJ -3.0 0 200 0 0
JA -3.35 0 335.41 0 0
JB 0 0 300 0 0
JC 3.35 0 360.56 0 0
IC 0 -0.71 300 0 151.23
HC 0 1 424.26 0 424.26
HD 0 -0.71 300 0 151.23
GD 3.35 0 360.56 0 0
GE 0 0 300 0 0
Σ= 0 1029.8

𝛴 𝑓µ𝐿
HC =
Σ µ2 L

0
HC =
1029.8

HC = 0

10
Structure, Load Case: CASE1, Units: kN-m
LinPro 2.7 | Enes Siljak | eness@bosnia.ba | www.line.co.ba

Reactions, Comb: CASE1, Units: kN-m

LinPro 2.7 | Enes Siljak | eness@bosnia.ba | www.line.co.ba

Axial Force Diagram, Comb: CASE1, Units: kN-m

LinPro 2.7 | Enes Siljak | eness@bosnia.ba | www.line.co.ba
11
Deflection
Real forces

Virtual forces

12
Caculation for load 1Kn

Members f(kN) µ(kN) L(mm) fµL

AB 0.5 0 150 0
BC 0.5 0 200 0
CD 1.0 -0.71 300 -213
DE 0.5 0 200 0
EF 0.5 0 150 0
FG -1.12 0 335.41 0
GH -1.0 0 200 0
HI -1.0 -0.71 300 213
IJ -1.0 0 200 0
JA -1.12 0 335.41 0
JB 0 0 300 0
JC 1.12 0 360.56 0
IC 0 -0.71 300 0
HC 0 1 424.26 0
HD 0 -0.71 300 0
GD 1.12 0 360.56 0
GE 0 0 300 0
Σ= 0
Displacement at member HC
𝐹.μ.L
Δ HC = ∑ ( )
𝐴𝐸
0
=∑( )
(1×10−2)(20×107)

=0m

13
Deformed shape, Comb: CASE1, Units: kN-m
LinPro 2.7 | Enes Siljak | eness@bosnia.ba | www.line.co.ba
Real forces

Virtual forces

14
Calculation for load 3Kn

Members f(kN) µ(kN) L(mm) fµL

AB 1.5 0 150 0
BC 1.5 0 200 0
CD 3.0 -0.71 300 -639.0
DE 1.5 0 200 0
EF 1.5 0 150 0
FG -3.35 0 335.41 0
GH -3.0 0 200 0
HI -3.0 -0.71 300 639.0
IJ -3.0 0 200 0
JA -3.35 0 335.41 0
JB 0 0 300 0
JC 3.35 0 360.56 0
IC 0 -0.71 300 0
HC 0 1 424.26 0
HD 0 -0.71 300 0
GD 3.35 0 360.56 0
GE 0 0 300 0
Σ= 0

Displacement at member HC
𝐹.μ.L
Δ HC = ∑ ( )
𝐴𝐸
0
=∑( )
(1×10−2)(20×107)
=0m

15

Deformed shape, Comb: CASE1, Units: kN-m

Comparison of manual calculation and Linpro Software
Load 1kN
Manual LinPro
Members calculation, software Difference
Forces (kN) Forces (kN)
AB 0.5 0.33 0.17
BC 0.5 0.35 0.15
CD 1.0 0.99 0.01
DE 0.5 0.35 0.15
EF 0.5 0.33 0.17
FG -1.12 -1.12 0
GH -1.0 -0.99 0.01
HI -1.0 -0.99 0.01
IJ -1.0 -0.99 0.01
JA -1.12 -1.12 0
JB 0 0.04 0.04
JC 1.12 1.12 0
IC 0 0.05 0.05
HC 0 0.05 0.05
HD 0 0.04 0.04
GD 1.12 1.12 0
GE 0 0.04 0.04

16
Load 3kN

Manual LinPro
Members calculation, software Difference
Forces (kN) Forces (kN)
AB 1.5 0.99 0.51
BC 1.5 1.06 0.44
CD 3.0 2.96 0.04
DE 1.5 1.06 0.44
EF 1.5 0.99 0.51
FG -3.35 -2.98 0.37
GH -3.0 -2.96 0.04
HI -3.0 -2.96 0.04
IJ -3.0 -2.96 0.04
JA -3.35 -2.98 0.37
JB 0 0.11 0.11
JC 3.35 3.36 0.01
IC 0 0.14 0.14
HC 0 0.04 0.04
HD 0 0.14 0.14
GD 3.35 3.35 0
GE 0 0.12 0.12

Deflection
Manual Calculation LinPro Analysis
Load (kN) Difference (kN)
Forces (kN) Forces (kN)
1.0 0.0000 0.000004 0.000004

3.0 0.0000 0.000013 0.000013

17
2.2 DISCUSSION
Based on our project, we use two loads to test the bridge which is 1 kN and 3 kN. We
test our bridge using LinPro software and because of pandemic Covid-19, we cannot test the
bridge with the real load in campus. So, we use LinPro software to compare the internal forces
with the manual calculation of the bridge. We use alternative method to find the internal forces
in manual calculation. So, based on the first load comparison in 1 kN, the value of internal
forces in LinPro software and manual calculation have some differences. There are only 4
members did not have the differences which is member FG, JA, JC and GD. The other members
have below than 0.5 differences. Member For second load comparison in 3 kN, there are a few
differences between LinPro software and manual calculation. Only member GD have zero
difference. For the other members, the differences are below then 0.5. Next, manual calculation
for deflection using these two loads is 0.000000 kN but in LinPro software in load no.1 with
1kN the deflection is 0.000004kN. In load no.2 the deflection using LinPro software is
0.000013kN. In conclusion there are a bit differences between LinPro analysis and Manual
calculation which is below then 0.5 kN for the internal forces and in 0.000004 kN for deflection
in load no.1 and 0.000013kN for deflection in load no2.

18
 CHAPTER 3

SUMMARY

3.1 CONCLUSION

All of the data in the calculation was obtained. Some of the calculations for the manual
calculation vary from the calculations shown in the application for linpro. A few measurements
are using the linpro formula, which can not be determined using a manual calculation. It is
because the implementation of LinPro is more accurate, but that does not mean that the manual
calculation is not right because, as in the discussion and data analysis in part 2, only a small
difference was shown.

19
 CHAPTER 4
REFFERENCES

References
1. E.Yamaguchi, R. K. (2011). Post-Member-Failure Analysis Method of Steel Truss
Bridge. Procedia Engineering, 656-611.
2. Hibbeler, R. C. (2018). Structural Analysis Tenth Edition in SI Units. United
Kingdom: Pearson Education.
3. Ho-KyungKim, M.-J. L.-P. (2002). Non-linear shape-finding analysis of a self-
anchored suspension bridge. Engineering Structure, 1547-1559.

20