building structure assignment 1

84
BUILDING STRUCTURE TREVOR N JC HOREAU 0308914 / TEH KAH KEN 0314502 / LEE MAY WEN, ANDREA 0314320 CHEN ROU ANN 1001G76463 / WONG KWOK KENN 0300146 / NUR ADILA ZAAS 0310417

Upload: nur-zaas

Post on 18-Aug-2015

45 views

Category:

Education


10 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

BUILD ING STRUCTURE TREVOR N JC HOREAU 0308914 / TEH KAH KEN 0314502 / LEE MAY WEN, ANDREA 0314320

CHEN ROU ANN 1001G76463 / WONG KWOK KENN 0300146 / NUR ADILA ZAAS 0310417

Page 2: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 3: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 4: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 5: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

I N T R O D U C T I O N

P R E C E D E N T S T U D Y

M A T E R I A L A N D T R U S S A N A LY S I S

M O D E L T E S T I N G

C O N C L U S I O N

A P P E N D I X

R E F E R E N C E S

TABLE OF CONTENT

Page 6: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

1 .0 I N T R O D U C T I O N“Introduction of our understanding and briefs”

Page 7: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

1.1 OBJECTIVE The aim of this project is to develop a deeper understanding towards

the tensile and compressive strength of construction materials. Students are

required to design a perfect truss bridge with a high level of aesthetic value

and minimal construction materials. The bridge has to be of a 750mm clear

span, not exceeding the maximum weight of 200g. This report is a compilation

of our undertanding and analysis based on precedent studies conducted, con-

struction materials and the deisgn of our truss bridge.

1.2 INTRODUCTION OF TENSION Tension describes the pulling force exerted by each end of any one-

dimensional continuous object, be it a string, rope, cable or wire. The tensile

force is focused along the length of an object and pulls uniformly on opposite

ends of it.

1.3 INTRODUCTION OF COMPRESSION Compressive force (or “compression strength”) refers to the capacity of

a material in resistingpushing forces that are focussed axially. Compressive

force can also be defined as the capacity of a structure to withstand loads

tending to reduce its size.

COMPRESSION TENSION

Image 1

Analysis of

compression (LEFT)

and tension (RIGHT)

IMAGE 1

Page 8: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

2.0 P R E C E D E N T S T U D Y“Knowledge and understanding to a id us in designing our fet tuccin i br idge”

Page 9: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

Officially opened in 1890, the Forth Road Bridge occupies a beautiful

location in the Firth of Forth on the East coast of Scotland, connecting Fife

and the North of Scotland with capital city Edinburgh and the South. The

bridge is composed of two railway lines cross the Forth Bridge, supported

47.8 meters above high water, linking much of Northern Scotland with

Edinburgh and England to the South. The lines of track sit on a ‘bridge within

a bridge,’ an internal viaduct supported within the enormous cantilever towers

and arms which is often overlooked.Construction techniques as well as design

improvements can be administered due to ongoing advances in design and

construction, the development of materials and reduction of cost in what is

considered a necessity in a modern day bridge.

2 . 1 F O R T H R O A D B R I D G EImage 2Forth Road Bridge

on the east coast of

Scotland

IMAGE 2

Page 10: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

The bridge spans up to a total of 2460 meters. It is composed of two

approach viaducts, six cantilever arms supported by three towers, with two

central connecting spans. Abutments (supports the lateral pressure of an arch

or span) are found at the end of each of the two outer-most cantilevers. Two

railway lines sit on an internal viaduct supported within the cantilevered

towers; these carried 47.8 meters above high water.

2 . 2 E L E M E N T S O F T H E B R I D G E

Four of the six cantilever arms are fixed. These are held strongly in

position by the two granite abutments at the ends of each approach viaduct.

Two ‘suspended spans’, over one hundred and five meters long link the two

outer cantilever towers with the central one. In a nutshell, the superstructure

for this bridge functions as a standard truss – with specific members carrying

out either tension or compressive forces.

The centre of the bridge consists of three main piers, with two cantilever

arms built out from each pier. Two viaducts consisting of a pair of lattice

girders each spanning over fifty-one meters lead up to the centre, which is

ultimately supported over forty meters above high-water level on masonry

piers.

Image 3Two men represent

main cantilever

tower

Page 11: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

IN COMPARISON

The two men sat on chairs with outstretched arms represent the main

cantilever towers, in between them is a central span connecting the two.

Anchorage for the cantilevers is provided by the bricks at either side. As load

is applied to the central span (in this case by a third man) the outside men’s

arms come into tension, and the sticks they’re holding and the men’s bodies

experience compressive forces. In reality the bridge has three cantilever

towers, but the principle can be applied equally to this third tower. All

compression members (struts) in this bridge are tubular sections made up of

many small steel plates riveted together, while tension is carried in lattice truss

members. Wind bracing is provided by further lattice trusses spanning

between the main superstructure members.

Image 4Elevation drawing of

Forth Road Bridge

Page 12: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

The Francis Scott Bridge, also known as Outer Harbour Bridge or Key

Bridge is a continuous truss bridge spanning over the Patapsco River in

Baltimore, Maryland, The United States of America. This is the longest bridge

(17540 metres) in Baltimore and the third longest span (366 metres) of any

continuous truss in the world. Upon completion, the bridge was officially

opened in March 1977 and estimated to carry 11.5 m`illion vehicles annually.

The technique used in the construction of this bridge can be identified as the

Baltimore truss.

2 . 3 F R A N C I S S C O T T B R I D G E

The Baltimore truss is a subclass of the Pratt truss. It is designed to

prevent buckling in the compression members and also control deflection by

having additional bracing in the lower section of the truss. Due to the rigid and

strong design of this truss, it is mainly used for train bridges.

Image 5Axono Angle of

Franciss Scott

Bridge

Page 13: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

The construction of this bridge is complicated in which the order of this

bridge is meticulously calculated. It is achieved by having consistent spacing

of the trusses in the middle section of the bridge together with equal spacing

of the suspended cables in the arch section.

Due to the long span of the arch section of the bridge, a suspended,

continuous truss design is used for this span. The suspended cables linking

between the truss and the deck will prevent the deck from any construction

failures due to tensile and compressive forces when there is presence of load

acting on this section. The trusses on top of the deck are in the form of an

arch because of its stronger structural property than the beam and column

form. In addition, the arch adds for aesthetic value to the design. Apart from

that, the arches will transfer loads back into the bearings on the piers then

into the foundation. Steel sections incorporated between front truss and the

back trusses are to provide stability and torsion resistant to the structure.

Image 6Front Photo of Scott

Bridge (Top)

Image 7 Elevation of Pratt

Truss (Left Bottom)

Elevation of

Baltimore Truss

(Right Bottom)

Page 14: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

The bridge’s superstructure involved few construction phases. The first

phase involved building all the span of the bridge across the top of the piers

built in the substructure. A total of eleven piers are constructed in reinforced

concrete prior to provide support to the bridge in which the decks are placed.

Later on, they are further supported and strengthen by the continuous truss.

Image 8Cables linking the

truss and deck

together.

Page 15: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

The main steel trusses are prefabricated in four major parts, which

the arch truss would be constructed in two parts, and the regular trusses on

the either side of the arch truss. These separated components made up of

I-beams are then transported to the site by heavy lift floating whereby they are

connected together through welding and girder plates with the aid of crags

on ships to hoist the parts 56.4 metres above the decks (highest point of the

span to the deck under) of the bridge.

Image 9Construction of the

truss in multiple

parts.

Page 16: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

3.0 M A T E R I A L A N A LY S I S“Before exper iment started, analys ing mater ia ls are the main concern”

Page 17: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

3.1 TYPE OF FETTUCCINE ANALYSIS As stated in the brief, fettuccine is the only material used for the model.

With this, the tensile and compressive strength of different brands of fettuc-

cine were studied and tested. The most suitable one to be used for our model

was determine.

Methods: -i. Strips of fettuccine were laid on a flat surface

ii. Load was placed to test the rate of buckling

iii. Time taken until failure was measured in order to determine the strength

& flexibility of the fettuccine

iv. Steps were repeated with a different brand

Results: -i. San Remo

(chosen fettuccine)

ii. Agnesi

iii. Barilla

- carried most weight- medium flexibility- medium rough surface

-carried medium weight

-flexible

-lightweight and thin fetuccini

- carried less weight

-very flexible

-lightest and thinnest fetuccini

Image 10San Remo

Fettuccine (left)

Image 11Agnesi Fettuccine

(middle)

Image 12Barilla

(right)

Page 18: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

3.2 ADHESIVE MATERIAL ANALYSIS Different kinds of glue were tested to determine which was more

efficient in terms of holding the fettucine together. The results obtained from

our analysis is stated below: -

RANKING ADHESIVE MATERIALS REASON1 3 Seconds Glue i.Highest efficiency

ii. Dries the fastest

iii.Will flow into smallest

corners and joints

2 Elephant Glue i. Moderate Efficiency

ii. Time consumingin terms

of workmanship

iii. Longer solidify time

3 Hot Glue Gun i. Low Efficiency

ii. Long solidify time

iv. Bulky Finishing

v. Drastic increase in weight

when dried

Image 133 Seconds Glue

(left)

Image 14Elephant Glue

(middle)

Image 15Hot Glue Gun

(right)

Page 19: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

3.3 SUPPORT MATERIALS ANALYSISMaterials that helped us throughout fetuccini bridge’s assignment

ii. Bucket

iii. Hook iv. Water Bottle

i. Weighing Machine

A measuring instrument in determining

the weight or mass of an object. This

was used to measure the weight of

fettuccine pieces to ensure the final

weight of our bridge did not exceed

the maximum limit.

A vertical cylinder with an open top

and a flat bottom, used to carry both

liquids and solids, aiding in the load

distribution process.

Loads used in tests conducted.Serves as a connection between the

fettuccine bridge and the bucket.

Image 16Weighing

Machine

(Top Left)

Image 17Blue Bucket

(Top Right)

Image 18Steel Hook

(Bottom Left)

Image 19Water Bottle

(Bottom Right)

Page 20: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

3.3 STRENGTH OF MATERIAL ANALYSIS As fettuccini is the only material used for the model, its quality and

strength is required to be studied and thoroughly tested before making the

model. We aim to:

i) Achieve a high level of aesthetic value

ii) Use minimal construction material to achieve high efficiency.

2. The table (Table 1) below shows the strength of each fettuccine analysed

by applying point pressure on the middle. Different numbers, orientation and

arrangements of fettuccine were used to form the members.

Clear Span(cm)

Length Of Fettuccine (cm)

PerpendicularDistance

Weight Sustained(Horizontal Facing)

Weight Sustained(Horizontal Facing)

20

20

20

20

20

26

26

26

26

26

1

2

3

4

5

2

3

4

5

6.8

2.7

3.7

4.8

5.8

6

TABLE 1 Strength of each fettuccine analysed by applying point pressure on the middle

IMAGE 20 The loads (and reactions) bend the fettuccine and try to shear through it.

3. The strength of one fettucine appears to be lower when faced horizontally than

when it is faced vertically from 1 stick to 4 sticks. However, after 5 sticks, results turned

out to be the opposite. In conclusion, the greater the area exposed relative to its volume,

the weaker the fettuccine member is in resisting strains and stresses (The easier it is for

the member to break apart)

Page 21: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

DIRECTION OF FORCES DIRECTION OF FORCES

4. From the result, we decided to use fettuccine members of 1 to 4 sticks with vertical

facing on the truss member that required less strength.

IMAGE 21 When the fettuccine is loaded by forces, stress and strains are created throughout the interior of the beam.

TESTING ON SINGLE MEMBER

Strength: Very strong

This design is most preferable in terms of efficiency and

workmanship

Strength: Not so strong

This is an effective design with minimal human error

IMAGE 22 I-Beam

IMAGE 23 Layerrings

Page 22: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

4.0 B R I D G E A N A LY S I S “Studying d i fferent k ind of br idges g iv ing answer to the conclus ion”

Page 23: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

Completed fettuccine models were put to a test. The main aim of this test is to allow the bridge to withstand the greatest load but a minimum load was set initially. This is used to identify the model with the greatest potential to be constructed for the final bridge. The series of test shows the ups and downs on the bridges constructed. Through each test, considerations were made and adapted in the new bridge and consecutively. A total of seven tests were conducted prior to making the final bridge.

4.1 MISSION

Page 24: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

4.1.1 BRIDGE TESTING ONE

Details of the Bridge:Height and width = 750mm (width)

Length (top chord) = 600mmLength (bottom chord) = 750mm

Weight of this bridge = 125gMaximum load = 2350g

Efficiency = (2.350kg)^2 / 0.125kg = 44.18

ANALYSIS The bridge did not bend or twist as weight is gradually added.

Nevertheless, only the hook support broke when load reached at 2350g. The bridge holds it form and position.

CONSIDERATION: -

improve on the hook support

Page 25: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

BRIDGE TEST ONE

IMAGE 24 IMAGE 25

IMAGE 26 IMAGE 27

IMAGE 28

Image 24First Part

Image 25Second Part

Image 26Third Part

Image 27Fourth Part

Image 28Fifth Part

Page 26: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

4.1.2 BRIDGE TESTING TWO

Details of the Bridge:Height and width = 750mm (width)

Length (top chord) = 600mmLength (bottom chord) = 750mm

Weight of this bridge = 125gMaximum load = 2430 g

Efficiency = (2.430kg)^2 / 0.125kg = 47.24

ANALYSIS After the failure of the previous hook support, we improvised and came up with a different hook support design. A cross-bracing support was added. This support is able to withstand up to 2.4kg until the hook support broke. The failure of this bridge is only at the hook support. Meanwhile, the bridge

retained its form and did not collapse.

CONSIDERATION: -improve on the hook support

Page 27: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

IMAGE 29 IMAGE 30

IMAGE 31 IMAGE 32

BRIDGE TEST TWO

Image 29First Part

Image 30Second Part

Image 31Third Part

Image 32Fourth Part

Page 28: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

4.1.3 BRIDGE TESTING THREE

Details of the Bridge:Height and width = 750mm (width)

Length (top chord) = 600mmLength (bottom chord) = 750mm

Weight of this bridge = 130gMaximum load = 8100g

Efficiency = (8.100kg)^2 / 0.130kg = 504.69

ANALYSIS The hook support was rectified and an I-beam replaces the

horizontal support. The bridge remains stable has load is gradually added. The hook support did not break this time but however, the bottom

chord snapped causing the whole bridge to collapse.

CONSIDERATION: -Add support on the top & bottom chord

Page 29: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

IMAGE 33 IMAGE 34

IMAGE 35 IMAGE 36

BRIDGE TEST THREE

IMAGE 37

Image 33First Part

Image 34Second Part

Image 35Third Part

Image 36Fourth Part

Image 37Fifth Part

Page 30: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

4.1.4 BRIDGE TESTING FOUR

Details of the Bridge:Height and width = 750mm (width)

Length (top chord) = 600mmLength (bottom chord) = 750mm

Weight of this bridge = 130gMaximum load = 700 g

Efficiency = (0.700kg)^2 / 0.130kg = 3.77

ANALYSIS This bridge was an exact replicate of the previous bridge but blown

up to a bigger scale to fit the requirements of a 750mm clear span. Allmembers remain the same thickness and also the use of I beams as the hook

support.The failure of this bridge was identified as workmanship effort. The bridge twisted as load is gradually added up to the point the sides

broke causing the whole bridge to collapse. This is due to the bottom chord not being straight when constructing.

CONSIDERATION: -- Improve workmanship

- Ensure bottom chord is straight and sits balanced

on the table.

Page 31: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

IMAGE 38 IMAGE 39

IMAGE 40 IMAGE 41

BRIDGE TEST FOUR

IMAGE 42

Image 38First Part

Image 39Second Part

Image 40Third Part

Image 41Fourth Part

Image 42Fifth Part

Page 32: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

4.1.5 BRIDGE TESTING FIVE

Details of the Bridge:Height and width = 85mm (width)

Length (top chord) = 843mmLength (bottom chord) = 850mm

Weight of this bridge = 130gMaximum load = 2700g

Efficiency = (2.700kg)^2 / 0.130kg = 56.08

ANALYSIS All members remain the same thickness and use of I beams as the

hook support. This bridge failed as the bottom chord snapped.However, the hook support did not break and retain its form.

CONSIDERATION: -Strengthen the bottom chord

Page 33: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

IMAGE 43 IMAGE 44

IMAGE 45 IMAGE 46

BRIDGE TEST FIVE

IMAGE 47

Image 43First Part

Image 44Second Part

Image 45Third Part

Image 46Fourth Part

Image 47Fifth Part

Page 34: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

4.1.6 BRIDGE TESTING SIX

Details of the Bridge:Height and width = 110mm from highest point to bottom (height)

775 (width)Length (top chord) = 881mm

Length (bottom chord) = 850mmWeight of this bridge = 273gMaximum load = 2825 units

Efficiency = (2.825kg)^2 / 0.273kg = 29.23

ANALYSIS After doing the precedent studies, we decided to try out another bridge

with a different design. This bridge is steady and strong. However, the failure of this bridge happens on the hook support which is a cross-braced design. Upon

adding load up to 2.8kg, the hook support snaps. However the members of bridge remained intact. The bridge remained its form.

CONSIDERATION: -Straigthen its hook support.

Page 35: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

IMAGE 48 IMAGE 49

IMAGE 50 IMAGE 51

BRIDGE TEST SIX

IMAGE 52

Image 48First Part

Image 49Second Part

Image 50Third Part

Image 51Fourth Part

Image 52Fifth Part

Page 36: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

4.1.7 BRIDGE TESTING SEVEN

Details of the Bridge:Height and width = 110mm from highest point to bottom (height) 775 (width)

Length (top chord) = 881mmLength (bottom chord) = 850mm

Weight of this bridge = 280gMaximum load = 5315g

Efficiency = (5.315kg)^2 / 0.280kg = 100.89

ANALYSIS The bridge has same design as the previous bridge. However, the only

difference is the hook support. The conclusion was drawn based on theprevious tests that a hook support made from multiple layers of fetuccini

is not as strong as a hook support composed of I beams. In this test, the bridge withstand up to 5.3kg and “crack” sound can be heard. The failure of this bridge happens when one of the chord could not

take the load causing the whole bridge to collapse. However, the hook support did not deform.

CONSIDERATION: -Strengthen the supports on the side as it fails to hold

up the bridge.

Page 37: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

IMAGE 53 IMAGE 54

IMAGE 55 IMAGE 56

BRIDGE TEST SEVEN

IMAGE 57

Image 53First Part

Image 54Second Part

Image 55Third Part

Image 56Fourth Part

Image 57Fifth Part

Page 38: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

5.0 F I N A L M O D E L T E S T I N G“The h ighl ight of th is ass ignment”

Page 39: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

5.1 FINAL DESIGN OF OUR FETTUCCINE BRIDGE

Details of the Bridge: Height and width = 83mm(height)

52mm (width)Length (top chord) = 753mm

Length (bottom chord) = 866.75mmWeight of this bridge = 203g

Maximum load = 3.2kg

ANALYSIS Efficiency = (max load)2/ Weight of bridge = 10.24/0.203 = 50.44% efficient.

Although many considerations were taken into the final bridge design, the total weight of the bridge once completed was heavier than previous models, and we

feared a lower efficiency than 50%. However, during testing, we realised the final bridge design was a rigid and strong one and could have taken more load if

workmanship had been precise and accurate, unfortunately, with fettuccini sticks we cannot guarantee that. It was one part of the bottom chord that snapped away

and we strongly believe it was due to the inconsistency in the overlapping method of fettuccini pieces making up the chords.

CONSIDERATION

If we were to carry out a second final test, we would shorten the total length of the chord to reduce some weight and add rigidity. We would also remove all the top (single layer)

and bottom (double layer) horizontal connecting members and replace them with a single layer x-cross bracing from one façade to another. We believe this would drop down the weight of our bridge by at least 30-40g, and the max load would probably be a little bit

less, but our goal is obtaining best efficiency, therefore we would expect a higher efficiency value than 50%.

Page 40: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

IMAGE 58 IMAGE 59

IMAGE 60 IMAGE 61

FINAL BRIDGE TEST

IMAGE 62

Image 58First Part

Image 59Second Part

Image 60Third Part

Image 61Fourth Part

Image 62Fifth Part

Page 41: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

43.88

71.00

376.50

91.1981.23

58°58°58°58°58°58°58°58°

32° 32°

58°

32° 32°

58°

32°

32°

58°

32°

58°

32°

32°

58°

32°

58°

32°

32°

58°

55°

35°

50mm

71mm

753mm

breaking point the chord is stressed to a snapping point, at the 2points shown. no other member was affected/broken.

DISTANCE AND ANGLE OF TRUSSES

EFFECT ANALYSIS

Page 42: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

FORCE DISTRIBUTION IN TRUSS

750.00

375.00

1

2

3

45 6

7

8

9

10

25N 25N50N

1

2

3

45 6

7

8

9

10

25N 25N50N

Page 43: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

A P P E N D I X

Page 44: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

AIM

We need to identify 6 Case Study from the activity that our lecturers provided to help on

our understanding about truss analysis. As every case has the same load applied on it, we found out that

the Fx Fy and Momentum towards every cases has the same calculation also.

The calculations: -

∑Fx = 0

20 + 5- + 80 + Ra + RJx = 0

∑Fx = 0

150 + Rx+RJx= 0

-100+15-60-50-RJy= 0

(-RJyx 3.5) – 50(3.5) -80 (3.5) +60(6) -152(2) -20(1) + 50(8) + 100(2) = 0

RJx (3.5) = 185

RJx=52.857

150+ Ra +52.587 = 0

Ra=-202.827

To determine wether its a perfect truss: -

2J = m+3

1. 2J = 2 (a)

= 18

2. m + 3 = 15 + 3

= 18

thus,

It is a perfect truss.

Page 45: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

DONE BY TEH KAH KHEN

CASE 1

Page 46: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 47: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 48: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 49: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

DONE BY NUR ADILA ZAAS

CASE 2

Page 50: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 51: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 52: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 53: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 54: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 55: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

CASE 3

DONE BY ANDREA LEE

Page 56: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

DONE BY TREVOR NJC HOEREAU

CASE 4

Page 57: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 58: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 59: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 60: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 61: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

CASE 5

DONE BY KENN WONG

Page 62: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 63: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 64: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1
Page 65: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

CASE 6

DONE BY ROUANNE

Page 66: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

CASE 1

Page 67: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

CASE 2

Page 68: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

CASE 3

Page 69: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

CASE 4

Page 70: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

CASE 5

Page 71: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

CASE 6

Page 72: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

25N 25N50N

25N 25N50N

25N 25N50N

Page 73: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

25N 25N

50N

25N 25N50N

25N 25N50N

Page 74: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

25N 25N50N

25N 25N50N

25N 25N50N

Page 75: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

25N 50N

25N 25N50N

25N 25N50N

Page 76: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

25N 25N50N

1

2

3

45 6

7

8

9

10

25N 25N50N

25N 25N50N

Page 77: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

COMPRESSION AND TENSION ANALYSISAnalyzing all the cases in general, it is visible which is the most efficient amongst the 6.

Firstly, let us imagine all these cases are acting out simultaneously. Secondly, an important point to note is that the more force there is on an individual member, the more stress it is undertaking, hence that member will break more easily.

For example, looking at case 2, the vertical column takes the most force of 210KN and will fail first. And in this case, is the least efficient.

In case 3, the vertical column that transfers 150KN would collapse followed by the top member that transfers 202.86KN as the force is not distributed evenly to the nearby members.

Case 4 and 5 have two end vertical members transferring zero load, hence making those members inactive and useless in this system. However case 4 would collapse before case 5 because the second column from the left holds more weight than the 5th case, making case 5 truss system more efficient than case 4 due to the weight distribution.

In case 6, the two top horizontal members will collapse first as they are transferring the most load. Case 6 is of moderate efficiency compared to case 4 and 5. However, case 1 is the most efficient as there is an obvious better distribution of load.

Page 78: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

Analyzing all the cases in general, it is visible which is the most efficient amongst the 6.

Firstly, let us imagine all these cases are acting out simultaneously. Secondly, an important point to note is that the more force there is on an individual member, the more stress it is undertaking, hence that member will break more easily.

For example, looking at case 2, the vertical column takes the most force of 210KN and will fail first. And in this case, is the least efficient.

In case 3, the vertical column that transfers 150KN would collapse followed by the top member that transfers 202.86KN as the force is not distributed evenly to the nearby members.

Case 4 and 5 have two end vertical members transferring zero load, hence making those members inactive and useless in this system. However case 4 would collapse before case 5 because the second column from the left holds more weight than the 5th case, making case 5 truss system more efficient than case 4 due to the weight distribution.

In case 6, the two top horizontal members will collapse first as they are transferring the most load. Case 6 is of moderate efficiency compared to case 4 and 5. However, case 1 is the most efficient as there is an obvious better distribution of load.

CONCLUSION

Page 79: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

R E F E R E N C E S

Page 80: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

IMAGE REFERENCESImage 1 : retrieved from http://santabarbarastrength.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/400px- compression_tension_and_shear_forces-300x151.png

Image 2 : retrieved from http://i2.wp.com/caledonianmercury.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Forth- Bridge-2.jpg?resize=1502%2C738

Image 3 : retrieved from http://www.engineering-timelines.com/why/forthRailBridge/forthRailBridge_03.jpg Image 4 : retrieved from http://dita2indesign.sourceforge.net/dita_gutenberg_samples/dita_ encyclopaedia_britannica/html/entries/images/bridges_23.png

Image 5 : retrieved from http://www.ce.jhu.edu/baltimorestructures/Buildings/Francis%20Scott%20 Key%20 Bridge/2.JPG

Image 6 : retrieved from http://skyserver.sdss3.org/sdss2013/images/keybridge.jpg

Image 7 : retrieved from https://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall09/cos323/assign/truss/ps2/truss2.png

Image 8 : retrieved from http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/8221330.jpg

Image 9 : retrieved from http://betterarchitecture.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/sydney-harbour-bridge-under-con-struction.jpg

Image 10 : retrieved from https://grocermart.com/image/cache/data/SanRemo1/fettuccine-1800x1800.jpg

Image 11 : retrieved from http://en.creation.com.tw/userfiles/sm/sm350_images_E1/73/2012011963065545.jpg

Image 12 : retrieved from http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81MRq%2BcQYdL._SL1500_.jpg

Image 13 : retrieved from http://vitaltechnical.com/image/cache/data/product/super/VT-802-1qxt-500x500.jpg

Image 14 : retrieved from http://www.buystationery.com.sg/upload/1262941565.jpg

Image 15 : retrieved from http://letsmakerobots.com/files/field_primary_image/24076.jpg?

Image 16 : retrieved from http://media1.in.88db.com/in/DB88UploadFiles/2012/11/21/17750650-294E-4435-AC42-8154EE2496E9.jpg

Image 17 : retrieved from http://www.axis-cleaningsupplies.co.uk/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78e-ab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/u/h/uhbb1030l_10ltr_bucket_blue.png

Image 18 : retrieved from http://www.preserveshop.co.uk/images/stainless-steel-hanging-hook.jpg

Image 19 : retrieved from http://cdn5.triplepundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/bottled-water.jpg

Image 20 : drawn by Chen Rou Anne

Image 21: drawn by Chen Rou Anne

Image 22 : drawn by Chen Rou Anne

Image 23 : drawn by Chen Rou Anne

Image 24 : photograph by Kenn Wong

Image 25: photograph by Kenn Wong

Image 26 : photograph by Kenn Wong

Page 81: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

Image 27 : photograph by Kenn Wong

Image 28 : photograph by Kenn Wong

Image 29 : photograph by Andrea Lee

Image 30 : photograph by Andrea Lee

Image 31 : photograph by Andrea Lee

Image 32 : photograph by Andrea Lee

Image 33 : photograph by Andrea Lee

Image 34 : photograph by Andrea Lee

Image 35 : photograph by Andrea Lee

Image 36 : photograph by Andrea Lee

Image 37 : photograph by Adila Zaas

Image 38 : photograph by Adila Zaas

Image 39 : photograph by Adila Zaas

Image 40 : photograph by Adila Zaas

Image 41 : photograph by Adila Zaas

Image 42 : photograph by Adila Zaas

Image 43 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 44 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 45 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 46 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 47 : photograph by Adila Zaas

Image 48 : photograph by Adila Zaas

Image 49 : photograph by Adila Zaas

Image 50 : photograph by Adila Zaas

Image 51 : photograph by Adila Zaas

Image 52 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 53 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 54 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 55 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 57 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Page 82: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

Image 58 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 59 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 60 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 61 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 62 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 63 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 64 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 65 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 66 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Image 67 : photograph by Kenny Teh

Page 83: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

REFERENCE LISTS

Kozel, S. (1997, August 14). Francis Scott Key Bridge (Outer Harbor Crossing). Retrieved October 8, 2014, from http://www.roadstothefuture.com/Balt_Outer_Harbor.html

Overview of Forth Bridge. (2014, January 1). Retrieved October 8, 2014, from http://www.scottish-places.info/features/featurefirst1053.html

Sangree, R. (2014). An Engineer’s Guide to Baltimore. Retrieved October 8, 2014, from http://www.ce.jhu.edu/baltimorestructures/Index.php?location=Francis%20Scott%20Key%20Bridge

T H Kwok, D. (2009, April 1). ANALYSIS OF FRANCIS SCOTT KEY BRIDGE (BALTIMORE). Retrieved October 8, 2014, from http://www.bath.ac.uk/ace/uploads/StudentProjects/Bridgeconference2009/Papers/KWOK.pdf

Triangulation & measurements at the Forth bridge; reprinted, with additions, from “The Engineer.” (1887, January 1). Retrieved October 8, 2014, from http://www.worldcat.org/title/triangulation-measurements-at-the-forth-bridge-a-description-of-the-measurements-of-a-base-line-the-triangulation-of-stations-therefrom-and-the-setting-out-of-the-foundations-and-portions-of-the-steel-work-reprinted-with-additions-from-the-engi-neer/oclc/123250114

Page 84: BUILDING STRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT 1

BOOK SIZE REFERENCE DO NOT IN-CLUDE THIS

PAGE