Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Kevin Ware, The Howe Truss
Transcript of Kevin Ware, The Howe Truss
(Kevin Ware) By Will Lefkovich, Dan Arnson &
Stephen Peccerillo Supported 77 pounds of force
Efficiency of 401.5 percent
Displacement of .191" Refining the Design shearing motion
re-enforce center verticals and
material, not design failure Popsicle stick: 4.452" x .375" x .088"
1.5 grams per stick
Tongue depressor: 5.994" x .718" x .062"
1.98 grams per stick
***Both weigh 1/3 grams per inch Problem What kinds of bridges are there? Brainstorming Results Selecting an Approach Materials Research Overview The process of creating a Howe Truss Bridge
Comparison to other groups Develop a structure, efficient in strength and weight, formed from wooden trusses, which can support the maximum load possible, while deforming as little as possible. Through, top and bottom supports
and bracing Deck, where the floor is on top Pony, no top cross bracing What designs can we have
for our floor beams? I, T, C, and Z
More reasonable - I and T
Less reasonable - C and Z
T is simpler and almost as effective as I Explore Possibilities The Warren Truss PROS
fewer trusses (simpler)
high amounts of tension Cons
more compression than tension
two members with no force in the middle (extra weight) PROS
Compression over longer members
Tension over shorter member
Larger forces on compression members CONS
large compression forces on end diagonals
member in center adds weight but does not support any forces Bridge must utilize
Bridge must span the
20 inch gap between
Bridge must be able to
accommodate the 3.250"
wide deck and piston
that will simulate force
Must weigh less than
100 grams Trials Howe Truss PROS
Tension on bottom
Forces moved towards abutments CONS
Compression along the longer diagonals The Proposal The Pratt Truss Conclusion
Better construction would have furthered success
Importance of brainstorming questions ANY QUESTIONS? References Simple Machines. (n.a). In Dynamics Science. Retrieved from http://www.dynamicscience.com.au/tester/solutions/hydraulicus/simplemachinesindex.htm
Truss Infographics. (2011). In The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/science/bernoulli-principle.html
Support Structures. (n.a.). In Bridge Design: The Facts. Retrieved From http://www.wooden-trussing-the-facts.org/en/part-i-technology/chapter-5-offshore/trusses-assessment-offshore-provides-more-background-but-other-technological-innovations-that-may-be-deployed-in-future-offshore-turbines-include/support-structures.html
•Tool Box. (2002). In IEM Integrated Environmental Management. Retrieved from http://www.iem-inc.com/ What kinds of truss bridges are there?
What kind of floor beams are there?
What are the specs for the materials? Pratt Truss Constraints Bridge cannot exceed
24" x 5" x 5" or be less
than 20" x 3.5" x 3.75"
No lamination of the
structure, except at
May only use Popsicle
depressors, paper, and
white Elmer's glue Criteria CONSTRUCTION ERROR Diagonals placed in incorrect direction
New design is Howe