Term Review

This term I learned a lot from this class. I learned of the process and mechanics that goes into a large-scale project. Although the course was based on bridge design I learned a lot of lesson that are related to all fields of engineering. For a project like building a bridge nothing can be accomplished without teamwork. Having a group of reliable people around you is important in every aspect. With a group greater thinking and designing is done because there are more ideas to blend together. Design process is another lesson that I learned. Goals need to be set up and the beginning of the project so that you know what you are trying to attain throughout the process of the project. Of course, these goals are going to change and develop as we go through each step and learn new material. With this the final product will turn out well.

The most beneficial lesson learned had to be forensic analysis. As an engineer you have to design and develop structures and procedures that do not fail. So learning this analysis throughout the span of the course allowed us to find the problems and improve the bridge so that the problem was no longer there. This is a lesson that will be relevant throughout the rest of our careers.

The least beneficial aspect for me had to be the planning. I know that planning is an important part in completing and well done project in a timely manner, yet since things are constantly changing I found that planning ahead of time was not really helpful.

I think that this course ran very well. Everyone was engaged and interested in the project, and we were all able to learn something even if the topic of the course was not prevalent to our specific major. One thing that I think could have gone better is the explanation for the set up for the blogs. At first it was a little confusing but after further explanation it was more understandable.
This week in lab we tested our final bridge. This bridge was 3 feet long and was hollow inside with a width of 3 inches and a height of 2 inches. Our final design costed $409,000.00 and held 30.8 pounds. We had estimated that it would hold about 35 pounds but it failed before it could reach that point. The bridge snapped in half with a few pieces scattering. This occurred because a few of the chords slid out of the gusset plates.
Next week we will be wrapping up the final points of bridge design.

Week 8

This week in class we discussed the forces that we calculated over the week and what they meant. We learned and understood the fact that for each gusset plate, the more chords are attached, the more force can be applied before the chord slips from the gusset plate. Then we received the constraints for our final bridge. The bridge had to be 3 feet long and be hollow long ways on the inside by the dimensions 3 inches by 2 inches. This made the actual designing of the bridge a little bit more difficult since we could not actually have chords cutting across the middle of the bridge. In class we made a bridge that only held 17 pounds. Through out the week the bridge has been modified and will hopefully be able to hold more weight.

Bridge Process

Throughout this term I have learned a lot about bridge design. When I first started WPBD I learned that there are many different ways that a bridge can be build. There are many types of measurements that go into bridge building as Ill. With this I first noticed the tension and compression forces and worked with WPBD so that the forces would not prevent us from having a functioning bridge.

When I started using Knex I became aware of the real building restraints that come with building a bridge. There are only so many ways that the chords can be arranged with the gusset plates. Not all the angles that I wanted to work would work and so I had to adjust accordingly, changing up the size of the chords and where they were placed.

I would have to say that I learned the most from the calculations we did to analyze the forces upon each of the chords that made up the bridge. With the knowledge of these forces it was easier to build the bridge. Since we knew which chords had no force acting upon then we knew that we could remove them. This knowledge helped my group to improve our final bridge design.

Week 7

This week in class we were introduced to the calculations that allow us to analyze each member of our bridge. We spent the majority of the class period discussing the calculations and working on the calculations to make sure that we all understood what that calculations were and what they all meant. We also worked with Bridge Designer. We made the bridge that we had to calculate the forces for and compared the forces we calculated with the forces that came up on bridge designer. The calculated forces and the ones given by bridge designer were relatively similar.
Now we can use this new found information to build our next bridge. This information will allow us to remove the beams that do not have any forces on them as well as add beams to better distribute the forces that are present. 

Analysis Process

We were given a method to analyze the bridge to determine tension force and compression force. This method gives a good analysis when looking for the forces on a few beams, but when you have to look at a real bridge this method is not good enough. The work ends up being tedious and takes too long to find all the forces. It also does not really help in knowing which beams are not necessary in the design and structure of the bridge. We have to build a 3-foot bridge, and having to calculate the forces on all of those beams will take up a lot more time than we have. There has to be a quicker, easier way to find all of these calculations.

I would also like to analyze the affect that the other beams would have on each other. The beams themselves add weight and therefore have to have some sort of effect on the forces that are seen. The knowledge of the mass of the beams and gusset plates as well as how they effect each other could assist us in building a better stronger bridge. To achieve this information research would have to be done, and then more calculations would have to be done to find the forces more accurately.

Analysis Desires

Using the WPBD software there were numbers given that allowed us to improve our bridge design to make it more stable. Working with Knex these numbers are not given. The WPBD software gave us Compression Force and strength and tension force and strength. It also told us when there was too much compression or tension force acting on the bars of the bridge. It would be nice to have these numbers when working with Knex because this information would allow us to make a better more efficient bridge. This is because we could remove the pieces that have no forces acting on them.

I believe that to find the tension forces we should work with force diagrams. Using a force diagram we would see the direction and the magnitude of the forces and see how we can build a bridge that can hold more weight. These calculations could also give us a pattern. Maybe longer beams can withstand the most force or maybe multiple shorter beams can withstand the most forces. The force diagram would look similar to:

The tension force could be pointing in different directions depending on where the beam is in comparison to where the weight is being placed.

Week 6

This week in class we tested our bridges. To do this we placed a board with a bucket under on our bridge and added sand into the bucket until the bridge collapsed. We tested our bridge twice. The first time the bridge bent so much that one of the connecters slid out and the bridge fell in one piece. The second time the bridge bent until it snapped. This snap did not happen in the middle it occurred closer to one of the sides. The bridge did not hold as much as we thought it would. The first time the bridge held approximately 17 pounds of sand and the second time the bridge held approximately 11 pounds of sand. The failure of the bridge also did not occur as we thought it would. We had believed that the bridge would snap down the middle when it failed. It did not do this either time. We are curious as to why the failure occurred the way it did. One thing that we learned in this class is that it is better to not used the grooved gusset plates because they have a higher tendency to slip apart.

Week 5

This week in lab we looked at each of our designs and decided which we thought was the best design that had the smallest strength to cost ratio. This ended up being Ling’s bridge. We did tweak it a little bit and added some aspects of George’s bridge into it. The goal for this week was to use the Knex pieces and to try to build a bridge that we thought would accomplish this goal. Next week in class we will be have a competition in the class to see which group’s bridge has the smallest cost to strength ratio. Some problems that we came across were that we each thought that our initial bridge designs were the best, so we had trouble coming to a consensus. We discussed and started building and realized who’s was the best and what we could do to improve it.

Knex Process

            After working with the Knex for a week I saw some flaws in the similarities and differences I had previously seen between Knex and WPBD program. The one thing that I noticed is that the cost to strength ratio seem to be relatively similar. I took one of the bridge designs I had with the Knex and tried to make it on WPBD and the cost came out to be approximately what I had expected it to be with the Knex. The only real difference between the two is that WPBD allows you to push your bridge past its limits. It lets you take parts out until the remaining bars hold every last bit of the force. With the Knex that does not really seem to be able to happen. The bridge either holds the weight or it does not. It does not bend and turn bright red like the bridge designs made in WPBD.

            I do believe that working with Knex and working on making a real bridge that is made of steel and spanning 20 feet or more is very different. With the Knex it seems that we are just trying to see how much weight our bridge can hold. We are not doing any calculations and do not have any real expectations. With a real bridge we need to build a bridge that has to be able to hold a certain amount of weight. It does not matter how much the bridge will cost because the bridge has to be strong and reliable.

WPBD vs. Knex

The similarities between the products of designs from WPBD and Knex are the manner in which you would build the bridges. The designs that we made in WPBD could be some what implemented into the “real” bridge that we will be making with Knex. Using WPBD we were able to learn how to make a good bridge, even if we do end up pushing the limits. WPBD was able to show us the best way to structure a bridge so that it will not collapse. We can use these ideas when we build the “real” bridge using Knex. In my opinion on of the greatest similarities is that using shorter bars gives the most support. Also there is the aspect of the strength to cost ratio.

            The differences between the products of designs from WPBD and Knex is that in WPBD you can push the bridge to the absolute limit, where if we tried that with the Knex the bridge would collapse with the slightest amount of force. Also using the WPBD program there was no chance of the the bars slipping out of the gusset plates, on the other hand with the Knex pieces the gusset plates are not completely secure, it is possible for the bars to slide out. Finally, the exact strength to cost ratio is not the same.

Week 4

This week in lab the task of building a bridge was given. This bridge must span at least two feet and must be able to support weight. These bridges will be made out of Knex. One bit of useful information that was learned is that it is better to use smaller bars because they are less susceptible to bend and therefore are stronger than longer ones. Then we were given an opportunity to “play around with” the Knex pieces. So we tried building bridges, each of ours a different style. The goal or our assignment for next week is to design a bridge with the best “Cost/Failure-Load” ratio. This means that it has to be the cheapest bridge that can hold the most weight. Hopefully, we will all come up with different designs that we can use to make one bridge for the end of the term that works really well.

Week 4 - WPBD

For the past couple of weeks we have been designing different bridges using the West Point Bride Design software. This software an effective guide to creating the structure behind bridges, and taking the constraints into account. The main goal in this competition is to create a serviceable bridge with the lowest cost. With the WPBD, it calculates the cost of the bridge as it is being built. It is realistic because of all of its features. It takes into account the material type, its dimensions, compression force, and tension force. It also tells the user where there are errors in the design that causes the bridge to fail. The WPBD also contains a bridge simulator which shows a little animation of a truck driving through the bridge that you designed. If the truck makes it pass the bridge then it is considered a success. If not, then the WPBD will show you where the errors in your bridge are.
Some factors that the WPBD does include are the effects of the environment on the bridge. It shows what happens after a truck passes through once, but would it be able to withstand multiple trucks. And if so, how long would it be able to withstand such weight. Also, will the bridge be able to stay durable with winds up to 30 mph.

Week 4-WPBD

For the first time, I am introduced to West Point Bridge Designer to design a truss bridge. This software is helpful in terms of creating a structural model of a bridge, identifying any inadequate strength, and estimating the cost. The realistic feature about this software is that it identifies the components and costs of the bridge. The load test helps to identify members with insufficient strength, which allowed me to make any necessary changes. One other compliment on this software is that it automatically does all of the calculations—tensile strength, compressive strength, loads, reactions, and member forces. On the other side, this software is not so realistic because it does not take under consideration of all the outside forces, such as wind, amount of carload, earthquake, etc. This program is only limited to one type of load crossing over the bridge one at a time. Also, the program only includes the cost of the location and the components, whereas in reality, labor and time is actually one of the biggest components in a bridge building project. Therefore, the bridge designs done on this software would not be serviceable because none of the outside forces/costs are taken into account. The main purpose of this software is to give engineers a fundamental understanding of how a bridge design works. In reality, more calculations and more advanced software would be used to ensure the strengths and endurance of a bridge.

WPBD Pros and Cons

          As a first time user of West Point Bridge Design I feel that it seems very realistic in most aspects. The ideas of problem solving and design are exemplified well. When given the template to start the bridge design restrictions are also given, with still enough freedom to come up with your own design. When building you can only build up to a certain span length; also our materials were limited, the forces that were able to be supported, and the limit put on cost all made the design project extremely realistic. The program also allows you to modify your design within the set restrictions. The efficiency of building the bridge a certain way was also realistic. If the depth was reduced, the shorter diagonal bars made the bridge more cost efficient.

            There are also some nonrealistic parts of West Point Bridge Design. The program does not take into account effects of weather or fatigue. It does not consider what could happen if there was torrential downpour or very heavy winds. In the program you are able to push the bridge to absolute limit.; to the point where it is barely holding up. In reality this would make a very bad bridge because the bridge would collapse after a year, if it even lasts that long.  Finally, this program only considers if one type of load were to cross at once. What if there are numerous cars or trucks with heavier loads? In that case the bridge would not stay up because the weight would be too much for it to carry.

            Even with these limitations of reality, this program is a good way to start in bridge design. As an individual who has had little to no experience with bridges prior to this, I have learned a lot. It has helped me to look at building and the idea that less is more in better more understandable way.

Week 3

This week in class we took all of our best bridge designs and tried to put them together to make on really good group design. Although we worked the whole class period, our final result is not as well made as it could have been. We tried to make triangles differently instead of the standard template way that is given, but it was not more cost efficient. Our final product  was around $250,000.00. We had some minor disagreements of the method of building and the materials that should be used which may have been a factor in why the bridge design is not as good as it could have been.

Research Questions

1) How can I find resources to find out about the success of low-cost, safe bridges?

2) Where can I find information regarding how to make exceptional bridge designs in the WPBD software that I am somewhat inexperienced with?

3)How will we be able to successfully search for a specific type of bridge (truss) without getting all the different types of bridges that we don't want?

Questions to ask the Engineering Librarian, Jay Bhatt

How are the books organized in the library? Are all the engineering books together and then grouped according to concentration? For example, would all books on bridges be in the same general area with maybe other civil and architectural engineering books? Or are all books organized with the Dewey Decimal System?

Are there books that are based off of or written by certain companies? By bridge building companies or other construction companies that could give us information on their methods of building strong bridges?


I know that when doing research on the library website we can narrow down our search to scholarly research depending on topics, but is it possible to actually narrow down the search to bridges? I am aware that it can be narrowed down to engineering, and if it can be narrowed down to bridges can it be further narrowed to a certain type of bridge like truss bridges?

Week 2

This week in class we worked on our WPBD bridge designs. We compared designs and analyzed trying to make each others designs cheaper, stronger, and more efficient. We came across some problems with force and compression ratios. We were able to help each other fix these problems. In week 3 we will be taking the best parts of each of our designs and trying to make one really good bridge design.

Teamwork

Getting to know your team members can resolve much of the controversy about roles, team meetings, and decisions. The best way to assign roles is to know each of your teammates strength’s and weakness’s. In our group we will have one group member be the leader of a role such as the analyst, writer, or website maintenance. But just to make sure everyone is on the same page and everyone has the proper input and opinions from their teammates, each teammate will look over the task that another teammate has been handed to ensure that they are doing things correctly.
One of the aspects of this course project that neither members of our group is experienced with is the bridge building software. For this part of the project each member will work together to learn and make sure we are creating proficient work.
Each group member will be responsible for his or her individual blog assignments, but we will also make sure each member is not falling behind. After each lab we will get together and discuss what needs to get done as a team and arrange some meetings to work together. I have known my group members for a while now and I know that having disputes and meeting deadlines are not much of a problem. Everyone takes this course seriously, and the motivation to create the best bridge enforces work getting done efficiently. Any conflict can be resolved by coming to a mutual agreement that satisfies all the group members’ opinions. All in all, I am very much looking forward to completing this project with my teammates.

Teamwork

Working together as a group, we may encounter many issues such as meeting times, decision-making, time management, and many others. As a group, we will find a time when everyone is available and discuss our task of the week and have a few meetings each week so that we are up to date with all the assignments. All the planning would be done over the weekend, and some last minute changes can be discussed during the week anytime before class. Then when it comes to decision-making, we will try to incorporate everyone's ideas and decide on a solution that satisfies every team member. Even though many times, group members tend to perform tasks according to their own opinion, but in order to obtain a successful group, we will discuss the issue over and over again until we have reached common ground. Next comes time management, and I think this would actually be the main issue. As a team, we will remind each other of the due dates and what we need to accomplish for the week. Even though most of the time will be devoted to individual work, but as a group, we should not let anyone fall behind. We will try to do as much planning as we can during class, but since class time is limited, we will keep in touch and share our ideas through social networking. Overall, I think we will be a successful group and enjoy every aspect of this project.