0 | P a g e

Bachelor of Science (Honours) (Architecture)

Building Structures (ARC 2523)

Project 1: Fettuccine Truss Bridge


Names and ID:

Ahmad Farhan Shah Bin Syed Amanullah 0303012
Chan Kah Leong, Leon 0310587
Ng Sueh Yi 0310700
Nur Fazlin Binti Zulkifli 0303613
Tan Hui Xian 0311719
Yasaanth Kirishnamoorthy 0304863



1 | P a g e

Contents

Introduction
Precedent Study Forth Bridge

Material Analysis:
Material Strength
Testing of Material Strength

Truss Analysis
Design Rationale
Bridge Design

Bridge Testing and Analysis:
Fettuccini Bridge Prototype
Fettuccini Bridge Final Model

Conclusion
Appendix
References

2 | P a g e

Introduction

The aim of this project is to develop the understanding of tension and compressive strength of
construction materials as well as the force distribution in a truss. This project requires designing a
perfect truss bridge which is of high aesthetic value and minimal construction material. The bridge
has to be of 600mm clear span and maximum weight of 150g. This report is a compilation of our
understanding and analysis on the precedent study, construction materials and the design of our
truss bridge.


3 | P a g e


Precedent Studies
Introduction

An analysis on precedent studies is conducted to aid in the design and construction of the fettuccine
bridge, as it provides the knowledge and understanding required to construct a bridge that is
efficient in carrying load and withstanding stress and forces. The precedent study of our analysis is
the Forth Bridge in Scotland. The analysis of this precedent study includes a brief introduction of the
bridge, the elements of the bridge and how the bridge works in tension and compression.





















4 | P a g e


Forth Bridge Analysis
Introduction:
The Forth Bridge is one of the most famous cantilever bridges in the world. The bridge was officially
opened in 1890, and it is the first cantilever-type bridge to be built of steel. It carries over 200 trains
a day over the Firth of Forth between North and South Queensferry. Techniques used in the
construction of this bridge is seldom seen in modern day bridges, having been replaced by faster and
cheaper methods, due to the cost and complexity of the construction and design of this bridge.
Possible design improvements and construction techniques can be implemented due to advances in
design and construction, the development of materials and reduction of cost in what is considered a
necessity in a modern day bridge.

Figure 1: Elevation of the Forth Bridge

Elements of the Bridge (Arrangement of Members and Orientation):
The total length of the bridge is 2460 meters. It is made up of two approach viaducts, six cantilever
arms supported by three towers, with two central connecting spans. There is an abutment at the
end of each of the two outer-most cantilevers, and the distance between the centre lines of these
two towers is 1630 meters. Two railway lines linking much of Northern Scotland with Edinburgh and
England to the South cross the Forth Bridge, supported 47.8 meters above high water. The lines of
the track sit on an internal viaduct supported within the enormous cantilever towers and arms which
is often overlooked.
The centre-most section of the bridge consists of three main piers, with two cantilever arms built out
from each pier. Two approach viaducts consisting of a pair of lattice girders each spanning over fifty-
one meters lead up to this central section, supported over forty meters above high-water level on
masonry piers.
Of the six cantilever arms, four are free cantilevers and two are fixed. The fixed cantilever arms are
held rigidly 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. The superstructure for this bridge works as a standard truss, with some members
always in tension and others always carrying compressive forces.

5 | P a g e



Figure 2: Living model showing principle of the Forth Bridge structure


How the Bridge experience Stress and Forces:


Two men sitting on chairs with outstretched arms represent the main cantilever towers, in between
them is a central span connecting the two. Bricks at either side provide anchorage for the
cantilevers. When load is applied to the central span, represented by a third man, the outside mens
arms come into tension, whereas the sticks they are holding and the mens bodies experience
compressive forces. This principle is applied to all three cantilever towers of the bridge.

All compression members (struts) in this bridge are tubular sections made up of many small steel
plates riveted together, whereas tension is carried in lattice truss members. Lattice trusses spanning
between the main superstructure members provide wind bracing.

Four separate masonry piers support the base of each of the three cantilever towers five and a half
meters above high-water. Each pier varies in depth depending on the ground below, with each being
almost fifteen meters in diameter at the top and larger beneath the water. The great cantilever
towers rise from these piers, and the cantilevers themselves spring towards either shore.




Figure 3: Sketch of the central Inchgarvie tower showing the simplified positions of applied loads for
analysis purposes.
6 | P a g e

Material Analysis
Material Strength
Fettuccine







As fettuccine is used as the only material for the model, its attribute is required to be studied and
tested before jumping straight to designing our bridge. We thought it imperative to study the
strength of a single fettuccine, as tensile and compressive strength in particular plays a big role in
determining the success or failure of structure.

Adhesives


&








Hot glue to "weld" the joints
together and further
strengthens them
Extremely strong, spot-accurate
gluing, will flow into smallest
corners and joints
7 | P a g e

Testing of Material Strength
Aim of the experiment: To investigate the relationship between the length of the fettuccini and the
maximum load said fettuccini can carry.

Inference: The maximum load a fettuccini can carry before it breaks depends on the length of the
fettuccini.

Hypothesis: The maximum load a fettuccini can carry before it breaks decreases as the length of the
fettuccini increases.

Variables in the experiment:
Manipulated variable: The length of the fettuccini in cm.
Responding variable: The maximum load the fettuccini can carry.
Fixed variable: The type and width of the fettuccini used. The weight of the weight balance.

List of apparatus and materials: Fettuccini, clamp, weight balance, load.

Arrangement of the apparatus:










8 | P a g e


Figure 1.1

Process:
1. The apparatus and materials are arranged as shown in (fig 1.1)
2. The same type of fettuccini with a width of 5 mm is used.
3. The length of the fettuccini, L = 2 cm.
4. The fettuccini is loaded with weights until it breaks.
5. The maximum load the fettuccini can carry before it breaks is recorded.
6. Step 4 and 5 are repeated three times with the same type of fettuccini of the same length
and the mean value is calculated.
7. The experiment is repeated with L = 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 and 20 cm.
8. Once the data is collected, a table and a graph are plotted.

Tabulating Data:

Length, L (cm)
Load, w (g) Mean Load, g
(w1+w2+w3)/3
W1 W2 W3
2 400 420 390 403
4 175 180 165 173
6 115 115 115 115
8 100 90 110 113
10 85 95 95 106
12 120 115 105 100
14 95 90 115 96
16 100 90 100 92
18 85 85 80 83
20 75 70 75 73









9 | P a g e

Analyzing the data:

Figure 1.2
According to the above graph, the fettuccini carries the highest mean load of 403 grams when its
length is L = 2 cm. There is then a drastic drop in the mean load it can carry when the length is
changed to L = 4 cm and L = 6 cm. However, the deviation in the mean value of the load is not as
apparent when the length of the fettuccini is between L = 6 cm and L = 10 cm. The graph in Figure
1.2 clearly shows how there is a decreasing trend in the mean value of the load it can carry with the
lowest mean load of 73 grams being recorded when the longest fettuccini of L = 20 is used.
Conclusion:
The data verifies that our hypothesis, the maximum load a fettuccini can carry before it breaks
decreases as the length of the fettuccini increases is correct.

10 | P a g e

Truss Analysis
PRATT TRUSS
This truss was patented in 1844 by two Boston railway engineers; Caleb Pratt and his son Thomas
Willis Pratt. It became popular for railway bridges because it was able to have long spans.




ARRANGEMENT OF MEMBERS AND ORIENTATION
You can identify a Pratt truss by its diagonal members, which (except the very end ones) all slants
down and in toward the centre of the span. All the diagonal members are subject to tension forces
only, while the shorter vertical members handle the compressive forces. Since the tension removes
the buckling risk, this allows for thinner diagonal members resulting in a more economic design.







What is remarkable about this style is that it remained popular even as wood gave way to iron, and
even still as iron gave way to steel.

11 | P a g e

PARKER TRUSS


The Parker truss is named after Charles H. Parker who patented the design on February 22, 1870.

ARRANGEMENT OF MEMBERS AND ORIENTATION
It is a variation of a Pratt truss but differs from the Pratt in that the top and bottom chord are not
parallel. It seems initially Parker used a curved top chord, but later it was simplified to use a
polygonal, or series of straight sections not in a line forming an approximate curve. The Parker uses
less material than an equivalent Pratt, but is a bit more complex to build.




12 | P a g e

Design Rationale

For this project, we are required to carry out a precedent study of a truss bridge, and using the
information obtained from the precedent study, we are required to design and construct a fettuccini
bridge of 600mm clear span and maximum weight of 150g. The bridge must be of high efficiency,
which means using the least amount of materials to sustain a higher amount of load. This bridge is
tested to fail, therefore, its strengths has to be determined in terms of tension and compression
strength as well as the material strength.
Through a series of experiments with the formation of bridge members and chords, including the
testing of the strength of the material used, which are the fettuccini and the adhesives, we have
designed and constructed a final bridge model of high efficiency and high aesthetic value.

13 | P a g e

Bridge Design


The bridge is designed with all aspects of the criteria brought into consideration, including the
aesthetic value of the design, the minimal use of construction materials as well as the high level of
efficiency. The bridge is well balanced in terms of the number of members on each side, with a curve
member at the top and the bottom to provide smoothness to the visual aesthetic of the design. The
use of the amount of construction materials is just enough to provide high efficiency in withstanding
the load applied.

Details of the Bridge:
Height and width = 11.3 mm (at the middle), 60cm clear span, 66cm in total
Length (top chord) = approx 660 mm
Length (bottom chord) = approx 600 mm
Weight of this bridge = 138 g
Maximum load = 11kg

Effiency: [(11)
2
]/138 = 0.88








14 | P a g e


Force Distribution in the Truss
These are the critical members within the bridge that undergoes tension and compression when
force is applied to it.


Figure: Diagram of the bridge indicating the tension and compression members


Members in Tension

Figure: Diagram of the bridge indicating the direction of forces in tension members

The members in tension are the diagonal members which all points towards the centre of the bridge,
where the load is applied. When forces are pulling the bridge and its members downwards from the
15 | P a g e

centre, these members help to balance the load by pulling in two opposite directions, half to the
right and half to the left. The members at the top are longer compared to the ones at the bottom,
because the force is pulling from the bottom, therefore the members at the top has to be longer in
order to withstand the pulling force from the bottom.

Members in Compression

Figure: Diagram of the bridge indicating the direction of forces in compression members

The members in compression are the vertical and horizontal members that hold and support the
bridge. The vertical members function to support the diagonal members and the horizontal
members function to hold the vertical members. The force pulling from the bottom is distributed
along the bridge according to the length of the vertical members, with the centre vertical member
being the longest to withstand the direct pull from the centre of the bridge. The horizontal members
are set in a concave shape with the ends curving downwards in opposition to the direct pull of the
force from the bottom, to withstand the downwards pulling force more effectively.










16 | P a g e

Bridge Testing and Analysis:
Fettuccini Bridge Prototype
The prototype model was built to test the efficiency of the bridge before the final testing. The model
was done using the reference of the cad drawing. The entire vertical members were fixed first for
making the work easier and faster. The entire vertical members were strengthened with two layers
of fettuccini to face the compression force. Then the arch was neatly glued together with the vertical
members to form a frame in which the tension members were fixed. The truss frames were made
twice to build the complete bridge.







The trusses were joined together with intermediate horizontal members. This part was done with
fixing the fettuccini in between the trusses. After the completion of model it was put for testing to
check its efficiency.










The testing was done with wrapping the intermediate members with cling wrap. The cling wrap was
wrapped strongly at the centre and tied to a bag. It was made sure the bag was light for adding the
17 | P a g e

weight. Then the edged of the bridges were placed to the tables. The weights were added slowly to
the bag. The weight of the bridge was 117 grams.
The testing was done slowly until the bridge fails. When the weight was 3 kg the intermediate
members broke, but the bridge didnt collapse. Since the intermediate part distributes the forces to
other members, the bridge lacked strengthening in the middle. And also it requires cross bracing in
the mid-range which allows the forces to be distributed equally to all the other members. This was
analysed and upgraded in the final model.







18 | P a g e

Fettuccini Bridge Final Model
The final model is an improved version of the prototype. The immediate members are strengthened
to be able to withstand the direct force pulling from the bottom. Cross bracing is added in the mid-
range to allow the forces to be distributed equally to all the other members.
The bridge is tested with loads of accumulated weights pulling from the bottom of the bridge. The
bridge is balanced on the edge of two tables. A piece of wood is placed in the centre to soften the
point of impact on the bridge. Aluminium foil warp is used to wrap around the bridge at the centre
to hold the bag where the weights are loaded. The weights are gradually increased until the bridge
fails and buckles.

The bridge starts to buckle when the load in the bag is increased to 11kg. The force at the centre is
the strongest, so the bridge starts to collapse at the centre.

The collapse begins inwards and the fettuccini is crushed.

19 | P a g e

The whole bridge is brought down in an instant.

In comparison to the prototype, the newly enhanced and improved bridge is able to withstand more
than three times the weight, which is 8kgs more. Previously it was able to withstand only 3kg, but
now it is able to withstand up to a total of 11kg. This shows how important it is to strengthen the
immediate members of the bridge, and to enable an equal distribution of forces to all the other
members of the bridge.
20 | P a g e

Conclusion
Through this truss bridge design, construction and testing, we have gained much understanding of
the analysis of truss bridges. Based on the research of the precedent studies and experiments that
were done, we have developed an understanding of the tension and compressive strength of
construction materials and the force distribution in a truss. This understanding has enabled us to
evaluate, explore and improve the attributes of construction materials as well as to explore and
apply the understanding of load distribution in a truss. We are also able to evaluate and identify
tension and compression members in a truss structure, and explore different arrangement of
members in a truss structure. Finally through this project, we are able to design a perfect truss
bridge which has a high aesthetic value and is made of minimal construction material.


21 | P a g e

Appendix
Exercise : Truss analysis


A total of 6 different truss systems which carry the same loads are analysed to determine which
truss arrangement is the most effective and why.

The following are the task distribution for the cases:
Case 1 : Chan Kah Leong, Leon
Case 2 : Ng Sueh Yi
Case 3 : Yasaanth Kirishnamoorthy
Case 4 : Tan Hui Xian
Case 5 : Ahmad Farhan Shah Bin Syed Amanullah
Case 6 : Nur Fazlin Binti Zulkifli
The analysis and calculations of trusses are attached after this page.



22 | P a g e

References:

Magee, A.D. (2007). A Critical Analysis of the Forth Bridge. Department of Architecture & Civil
Engineering, University of Bath.
Railway-technology.com. (n.d.). Forth Rail Bridge, Firth of Forth, Scotland. Retrieved from railway-
technology website: http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/forth-rail-bridge-firth-
scotland/