Analysis Desires - Lester

During Week 6 lab each group tested their bridge design using buckets of sand. Our bridge was least expensive, but only held 18 pounds. This does not lead to an idea cost to load ratio. We will modify the design before and during Week 7 to have the ratio be more ideal, then we will once again perform stress-tests on the design. Some extra data would be extremely helpful in this rebuilding process. In WPBD, it was easy to stress-test the bridge over and over. After breaking the bridge would reset without any effort. However, Knex pieces tended to snap and break, or pieces would fly far away and be difficult to recover or reassemble. In short, it is not a good idea to continue testing one bridge endlessly. Having numbers associated with the design would really help the testing process, as physical tests wouldn’t be so essential. The following knowledge would be helpful in the design process.

Knowing the weight that one triangle holds, depending on connection angles, gusset type, and length of members. Finding the amount of pressure that can be put on one gusset plate before it breaks. At the present time, I cannot think of a method for finding these numbers. Perhaps doing independent weight-bearing trials for many different types of triangles and compiling the data for the class to use. If these two pieces of knowledge are known, a design with an efficient cost/load ratio can be made without as much time consuming trails and rebuilding.