BUILDING STRUCTURES
[ARC 2213]
FETTUCCINE TRUSS
BRIDGE ANALYSIS
REPORT
C H O O A I L I N
0 3 1 7 2 5 3
E L A I N E B O N G
0 3 1 0 4 3 2
L A U E E T I A N
0 3 0 9 5 9 6
S O H Y O H S H I N G
0 3 0 8 0 1 0
S U R AY Y N S E LVA N
0 3 0 9 8 1 8
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
TA B L E O F C O N T E N T S
1 I N T R O D U C T I O N
2 M E T H O D L O G Y
2 . 1 P R E C E D E N T S T U D Y
2 . 2 M A K I N G O F F E T T U C C I N E B R I D G E
2 . 3 R E Q U I R E M E N T
3 P R E C E D E N T S T U D Y
4 A N A LY S I S
4 . 1 S T R E N G T H O F M AT E R I A L
4 . 2 A D H E S I V E A N A LY S I S
5 M O D E L M A K I N G
5 . 1 M E T H O D O F C O N S T R U C T I O N
5 . 2 J O I N T
6 T E S T I N G
6 . 1 F I R S T B R I D G E
6 . 2 S E C O N D B R I D G E
6 . 3 T H I R D B R I D G E
6 . 4 F I N A L B R I D G E
7 D E S I G N M O D I F I C AT I O N
7 . 1 F A I L U R E R E A S O N I N G
7 . 2 S O L U T I O N
8 C O N C L U S I O N
9 A P P E N D I X
1 0 R E F E R E N C E S
0 1
02
02
03
0 4
0 8
1 0
11
1 3
1 4
1 6
1 8
2 0
2 4
2 5
26
27
2 8
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 01
1 I N T R O D U C T I O N
This project aims to develop our understanding of tensile and compressive strength of
construction materials by understanding the distribution of force in a truss.
In order to do achieve that, we were required carry out a precedent study on a truss
bridge of our choice, analyzing the connections, arrangements and orientations of the
members. Once that was completed, we were required to design and construct a truss
bridge made out of fettuccine.
The requirements for this bridge include it having a 750mm clear span and a maximum
weight of 200g. This bridge will then be tested to fail and we were required to analyze
the reasons of its failure and calculate its efficiency.
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
2 M E T H O D O L O G Y
2.1 PRECEDENT STUDY
By looking through precedent studies to have a better understanding of the types of trusses
available. Next, understanding the forces that would be exerted to the trusses;
compression and tension, would allow us to make adjustment to our bridge, that would best
suit the given material; fettuccine.
2.2 MAKING OF FETTUCCINE BRIDGE
PHASE 01: STRENGTH OF MATERIAL
Understanding the properties of the fettuccine is important in order to build one bridge that
can carry maximum load. For the tensile strength in the fettuccine is considerable low when
compare to aluminium which has the same amount of stiffness to the fettuccine.
PHASE 02 : ADHESIVE
Choosing the right type of adhesive is important as it plays a huge role in this assignment.
As there are many types of adhesive in the market that each has their own function and
characteristics. Not only the type of adhesive is important but the brand of adhesive is
important as well, for different brand has different quality and choosing one that suits
constructing the fettuccine bridge is primary.
PHASE 03: MODEL MAKING
To ensure precision in our model making, Autocad drawings are drawn in 1:1 scale and
plotted out to ensure precision and ease our process. And in order to strengthen our bridge
as much as possible, each pasta is marked individually as each has their own location of
placement and length, and are glued accordance.
02
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 03
2 M E T H O D O L O G Y
PHASE 04 : MODEL TESTING
Finished models are being tested after placing aside to allow the adhesive to sit on the model.
By placing weight on the middle of intermediate member to ensure that load is evenly
distributed. All these are being recorded to allow us to fix and analysis our bridge.
2.3 REQUIREMENTS
• To have a clear span of 750mm
• Not exceeding the weight of 200g
• Only material allowed is fettuccine pasta and adhesive
• Allowed to use any type of adhesive possible
• Workmanship is put to consideration as part of aesthetic value
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
3 P R E C E D E N T S T U D Y
The Heshbon Bridge, located at Indiana, Pennsylvania state in the United State of America,
is one of the last state-standard truss bridges built. Many bridge were constructed across
the Pennsylvania state from the late 1920's through 1941. This bridge was constructed in
1941 by Paul Construction Company and Pennsylvania State Highway Department which
has a main span of 153ft(46.6m) with a total length of 158 ft(48.2m) and 26ft(7.9m)
r o a d w a y w i d t h o v e r t h e B l a c k L i c k C r e e k .
HESHBON BRIDGE, INDIANA (1941)
04
3 P R E C E D E N T S T U D Y
This bridge is a relatively small example of Pennsylvania's very attractive standard plan of
1930s to 1940s truss bridge design. As such, it features a shallower portal bracing design
that other bridges built to this standard. In 2009, the government wanted to replaced the
bridge but fortunately they decided to rehabilitate it instead of replacing it. This will include a
deck replacement as well as structural steel repairs. So, the Heshbon bridge represents a
good preservation project and it became one of the tourist attraction in Pennsylvania.
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
Heshbon Bridge from 1941-2009
Old railroad bridge with wooden
pathway.
Heshbon Bridge 2009 until today
After rehabilitate, the bridge
became a bike path
Heshbon Bridge Before Restore Heshbon Bridge After Restore
The map above shows the bridge is located over Black Lick Creek In Heshbon,
Indiana County, Pennsylvania.
05
3 P R E C E D E N T S T U D Y
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
The 1941, skewed, 158ft long, riveted Parker truss bridge is supported on ashlar
abutments with concrete caps. The trusses are traditionally composed with the upper
and lower chords being built up box sections, and the verticals and diagonals rolled I
sections. Lateral and sway bracing are laced channels. The deck is reinforced
concre te , and the stee l ra i l ings ins ide the t russ l ines are or ig ina l .
TRUSS CONNECTIONS AND MEMBERS
Portal view on bridge Top chord connections
Bottom chord connections.Connections of truss web
06
3 P R E C E D E N T S T U D Y
Vertical member detail End Post
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
Railing detailRailing
Abutments Ashlar abutment
07
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 08
4 A N A LY S I S4 . 1 S T R E N G T H O F M A T E R I A L
WEIGHT
With the requirement of only 200G, we had to creative solution, to reinforce our bridge
while making sure that the weight of bridge does not exceed the requirement. Thus we
came our with solution by selecting parts that holds load and reinforce it by adding layers
to it. But bearing in mind that the more layers added, the more weight it holds.
Before we started our model making, we did a little experiment of the maximum weight the
fettuccine can carry. We tried out with 4 different layers to carry out this experiment.
Experiment (left to right):
I. One Layer
II. Two Layers
III. Three Layers
IV. Four Layers
Experiment 03: Three Layers
When load is applied, members could be seen slightly sturdier
when compare to Experiment 2. But a slight bend in the middle
could be seen. Total weight being 1.8G
Experiment 02: Two Layers
In the two layer of fettuccine, a slight bend could be seen in the
fettuccine, although it is not as extreme as Experiment 1. Total
weight being 1.17G
Experiment 01: One Layer
Members starts to bend after load is applied with just one layer of
fettuccine. Total weight being 0.56G.
Experiment 4: Four Layers
With four layers, it has proven to be the most stable option
among all experiments. Total weight being 2.05G.
Properties of spaghetti (dry)
1. Ultimate tensile strength ~2000 psi
2. Stiffness (Young’s modulus)
E ~10,000,000 psi
(E=stress/strain)
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
4 A N A LY S I S4 . 1 S T R E N G T H O F M A T E R I A L
ORIENTATION
Horizontal members were placed between
trusses, to hold both pieces of the bridge
together. They held no force besides balancing
the whole truss bridge. Hence, we reduced the
horizontal members to one layer in our second
and third bridge, for our bridge to fit the
requirement in terms of the bridge’s weight.
V
S
Method 01 was used in our case
because the members were fitted
between the arch and the bottom
chord. This can ensure that the
load was distributed evenly to the
arch. Comparing to Method 02,
which the bracings were glued on
the outside truss. Thus, Method 01
was a better choice of orientation.
Where Method 02 is still able to
distribute the load but the bracings
were not secured onto arch and
bottom chord, relying on the glueMethod 01 Method 02
The intermediate member is where
the hook that held on load is
placed. Making its role important.
Where the orientation and its
layers are vital. We found out the
load can be transferred more
efficiently when it was placed
exactly in the middle in upright
position, where the load can be
distributed evenly to the sides.
09
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
4 A N A LY S I S4 . 2 A D H E S I V E A N A L Y S I S
Type of Adhesive Advantages Disadvantages
X’traseal’s Super Glue • High efficiency
• Fast solidify time
• Easy to use
• Easy to bend fettuccine
when applied
• Cracked joint after
dried for few days
Selleys’ Supa Glue • High efficiency
• Fastest solidify time
• Easy to use
• Cracked joint after
dried for few days
UHU Glue • Easy to use • Low efficiency
• Causes flexible joints
• Longer solidify time
• Causes bridge to
weigh more
Three different kinds of glue used to ensure the joints are strong and thus strengthen
the bridge.
Selleys’ Supa Glue was used the most while constructing our fettuccine bridge. It has
high efficiency and it dried faster compared to the other adhesives, as it is more
concentrated when compare to X’traseal’s Super Glue. To make sure the glue worked
at its best, allow the glue to settle in the bridge to make sure it is dry before the
t e s t i n g i t . T h i s i s t o e n s u r e t h e b r i d g e p e r f o r m a t i t s b e s t .
The X’traseal super glue is only used on the arch where slower solidify of glue is
needed in order to buy some time while constructing the arch, for better precision.
UHU Glue is avoided if possible, as it causes the joints to be flexible. It also requires
longer time to dry. Making it the worst option, for joints should be rigid.
10
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
5 M O D E L M A K I N G5 . 1 M E T H O D O F C O N S T R U C T I O N
02. We started off by doing the
bottom chord of the bridge by
dividing the base of the bridge into 4
layers with different length.
03. Then we glued the it together
using the method above to distribute
the breaking point of the base
evenly.
04. For the arc of the bridge, we
also divided it into 4 layers. In order
the get the shape of the arc, gluing
it layer by layer and bend it
accordingly.
01. First, we printed out a copy of
the design of our bridge so that it will
be easier for us to bend the
fettuccine to get the shape of the
arc.
05. We cut and glued the vertical
truss and the bracing of the bridge.
After completing one side of bridge,
we used the same method for the
other side
06. Finally, we connected the 2 sides
of the bridge by placing horizontal
fettuccine in between.
Joint
11
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 12
5 M O D E L M A K I N G
7. The middle piece of the
horizontal truss is reinforced as it
was the piece that holds the
weight.
9. The completed final model.
8. The top parts of the bridge are
joined with double layers of
fattucine.
5 . 1 M E T H O D O F C O N S T R U C T I O N
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
5 M O D E L M A K I N G5 . 2 J O I N T
PLAIN BUTT JOINT
1. Two fettuccine
doubled-layer to make it
stronger
3: Repeat this procedure.
2. Join one fettuccine to
other the end of another
fettuccine.
Final Product
OVERLAID JOINT
1. Randomly choose 2
fettuccine.
2. Place a fettuccine
horizontally in between of
the 2 fettucine.
3. Trim the excess and
repeat the procedure.
Final Product
13
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 14
6 T E S T I N G6 . 1 F I R S T B R I D G E
For our first bridge we used the
precedent study as a guideline for our
first bridge. By changing it to an arch to
allow the bridge to increase the
compression member. On our first trial
we did not focus much on the weight of
our bridge but more our reinforcing it and
understanding the adhesive and the orientation of the trusses. Although our required clear
span is just 750MM we added an additional 74MM on each sides of our bridge to allow it to
rest on the table, in order to spread the load applied on bridge. Each segments having a
total length of 80MM allowing us to produce total of an odd 11segments where we produce
just one ‘X’ truss on the middle segments. This is part of our technique in order to produce
as little weight than producing an even number of segments where we would be force toproduce two ‘X’ truss in order to be centralized.
Model Testing
Middle of intermediate member broke off after 6KG
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
6 T E S T I N G6 . 1 F I R S T B R I D G E
Length:
Width:
Height:
Weight:
Max. Load
Efficiency
After a few trials, only the intermediate member would
broke after applying force. Proving that our truss is
stable. Thus, the only problem with our bridge is the
weight of it. Resulting in the second bridge.
L
O
A
D
Compression
Tension
209MM
908MM
90MM
FAILURE
Two layers
Four layers
908MM
90MM
209MM
225G
6KG
0.16
15
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
6 T E S T I N G6 . 2 S E C O N D B R I D G E
The second bridge also
followed the design of the
precedent study - Heshbon
Bridge similar to the first bridge.
The first bridge was too heavy
as we have a weight limit stated
by the brief which was 200g.
We decided to maintain the
height and the bottom chordchord because these two were the most important members in a truss. So we reduced the
layers of the zero force members which were the horizontal members holding both truss
together. Two intermediate members were place in the middle where the load would be
hung. One, which had four layers, was placed in the centre of the whole truss to hold the
both trusses together. The other, which had eight layers, was placed diagonally on the
bottom chord intersecting with the middle member.
Intermediate member bending just before it breaks.
Broken intermediate members
16
209MM
900MM
90MM
L
O
A
D
Compression
Tension
FAILURE
Two layers
Four layersOne layer
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
6 T E S T I N G6 . 2 S E C O N D B R I D G E
Length:
Height:
Width:
Weight:
Max. Load:
Efficiency:
Only the intermediate members of the second bridge
broke off without damaging the truss which means that
it had not achieved its maximum efficiency yet with the
load of 5KG.
908MM
90MM
209MM
225G
5KG
0.12
17
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
6 T E S T I N G6 . 3 T H I R D B R I D G E
besides increasing stability, we also reduced 0.7G of weight which contributes into higher
efficiency. Total height of the third bridge is 178MM. Proven that our proposal of reducing
the height was a success. Conversely, when the height decreased, the center of gravity
become lower hence the bridge become more stable., standing up straight raises the
center of gravity above the base of support and decreases stability. The amount of layer
used in each location of the member is the same because we couldn’t afford to lessen thelayers of the bottom chord or the arch, thus we choose to shorten the height instead.
After considering from
failure of the second
bridge design, we
intended to reduce thehe igh t o f the a rch
Perspective view of third bridge. Placement of horizontal member is the
same with previous bridge
Model testing.
18
Two layers
Four layersOne layer
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ]
6 T E S T I N G6 . 3 T H I R D B R I D G E
L
O
A
D
Compression
Tension
178MM
908MM
90MM
FAILURE
The reason third bridge failed is because the horizontal
member was just one layer causing the joint not to be
strong enough to withstand the load exerted onto the
bridge. And the intermediate member broke fall off,
i s s u i n g a p r o b l e m w i t h w o r k m a n s h i p .
908MM
90MM
178MM
200G
3.8KG
0.0.722
FAILURE
Length
Width
Height
Weight
Max. Load:Efficiency:
19
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 20
6 T E S T I N G6 . 4 F I N A L B R I D G E
were broken. We decided to rearrange our horizontal bracing. Instead of using one strip of
fettuccine we decided to have two layers but reduce the number of horizontal bracing, thus
we managed not to exceed much weight as stated in requirement. We mainly placed these
bracings where the forces would act most upon.
By rearranging and adding the additional layer of to the horizontal fettuccine members, it
managed to increased the efficiency of our bridge. During the final testing of our bridge, the
middle of the immediate member of our bridge broke under the force exerted by the load.
After the testing of our third bridge,
our arch and trusses were still in
tact and only the horizontalbraces connecting the trusses
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 21
6 T E S T I N G6 . 4 F I N A L B R I D G E
L
O
A
D
Compression
Tension
178MM
908MM
90MM
FAILURE
Two layers
Four layersOne layer
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 22
6 T E S T I N G6 . 4 F I N A L B R I D G E
MODEL TESTING
Weight: ~ 500g Weight: ~ 1000g
Weight: ~ 1500g Weight: ~ 2000g
Weight: ~ 2500g Weight: ~ 3000g
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 23
6 T E S T I N G6 . 4 F I N A L B R I D G E
Weight: ~ 3500g Weight: ~ 4000g
Weight: ~ 4500g Weight: ~ 4700g
Length:
Width:
Height:
Weight:
Max. Load:
Efficiency:
908mm
90mm
178mm
202g
4.7kg
0.109
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 24
7 D E S I G N M O D I F I C AT I O N7 . 1 F A I L U R E R E A S O N I N G
Reason 01:
The bottom chord of our bridges aren’t completely touching the base at both sides, as it is
only partially touching the base. This is due to the lack of precision in our workmanship.
This cause our bridge to be unbalance and not stable. Our models could have slipped off
when load is being exerted towards bridge. Causing our bridge to be twisted.
Reason 02:
As some of the is slanted and not 180˚ flat, for nothing is perfect. As it is crucial to use a flat
fettuccine pasta for when layering the width of layered fettuccine would be uneven at
slanted area. And with the slanted part the load distribution would be disturb and unstable
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 25
7 D E S I G N M O D I F I C AT I O N7 . 2 S O L U T I O N
Solution 01:
Using masking tape on the members onto the printed drawing, to ensure that members
does not slipped off. Thus member would remain constant and provide precision. But one
would need to make take into consideration that masking tape is not as strong as we want
t h e m t o , s o m em b e rs wo u ld sh i f t wh e n wo rk i n g o n o th e r m em be rs .
Solution 02:
Using UHU Glue to fill the gaps in between joints would help Reason 01, but bearing in
mind that weight of bridge would increase and aesthetic value of the bridge would fall. By
reinforcing both Super Glue and UHU Glue, structure seems to work just fine with it.
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 26
8 C O N C L U S I O N
From this assignment we were able to have a better grasp of understanding
the load and compressive strength of construction material. Teaching us
methods as to constructing a building structurally stable. As forces and loads
plays an important role in this assignment, aiding us to understand how it is
distributed in truss. Not forgetting that we were to be creative and maintain
high level of aesthetic value while putting the minimizing the amount of
mate r ia l s used . Hence promot ing sus ta inab le a rch i tec tu re .
Group photo along with final bridge
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 27
9 A P P E N D I X
As for our individual part, we were assigned to further analyse total of 5 trusses. Each
were distributed to following :
First Case:
Second Case:
Third Case:
Fourth Case:
Fifth Case:
The analysis and calculations of trusses are attached after this page.
Elaine Bong Poh Hui
Lau Ee Tian
Surayyn Selvan
Choo Ai Lin
Soh You Shing
BUILDING STRUCTURES [ ARC 2213 ] 28
1 0 R E F E R E N C E S
Historic Bridges.org.(2012,January 11)..Retrived September
20,2014,from http://www.historicbridges.org/info/about.htm