Optimizing strength to weight in balsa wood deck arch truss bridge

  • Thread starter Thread starter Meep
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Strength Weight
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on optimizing the strength-to-weight ratio in a balsa wood deck arch truss bridge. A suggestion is made to use short diagonal braces instead of long ones to reduce weight and achieve more equilateral triangles. An analysis of both options for a single cell is recommended to evaluate their effectiveness. The conversation emphasizes the importance of design choices in structural efficiency. Overall, the optimization of truss design is crucial for enhancing performance.
Meep
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
Hey, so I'm designing a deck arch truss bridge from 1/4" x 1/4" balsa wood sticks and would like a few tips on how to optimize my design further. There are some constraints: no more than 1 layer of lamination (so 2 total), length minimum (whole thing is around 14 inches), and so on. The bridge is designed to support the highest weight at the center by a 2x2x1 inch wood block without bending too much.

I like the design I have currently, but want to go further and use some actual math to back it. Research online says a good rise to span ratio of the arch is around 1:4 to 1:6.5, but is there any math I could run through to optimize this using formulas of the strength of an arch to find a specific(ish) number that I can use?

The bridge is judged based on its strength but also its weight, so this must be accounted for as well. Also, are there any improvements I can do to the trusses and their configurations? If you have any questions or need clarification, I'd be happy to answer.

If anyone has free software recommendations for testing and modelling this type of bridge, please let me know. I'm currently using AutoCAD and SOLIDWORKS but I feel I could get better simulation results with other software.

Thanks!
Relevant Equations
?
1739247405351.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I notice you have the diagonal braces in each cell on the long diagonal. I would have gone for the short diagonal, both to save weight and to make the triangles closer to equilateral.
Perhaps you could analyse those two options, just for one 'cell'.
 
The book claims the answer is that all the magnitudes are the same because "the gravitational force on the penguin is the same". I'm having trouble understanding this. I thought the buoyant force was equal to the weight of the fluid displaced. Weight depends on mass which depends on density. Therefore, due to the differing densities the buoyant force will be different in each case? Is this incorrect?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
12K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K