Ananth Salagundi

Owen Banner
Nathan Mara
2.1.9 Truss Design
POE Block 2
12/09/15

Problem Statement
Our project was to design and test a truss that would fare better than the test trusses that
each of us had constructed before. For the project, we could only use balsa wood, glue and paper
and the paper gussets could not have been larger than the gussets used during the construction of
the test truss.Also, the truss had to fit in the apparatus [span must be greater than 6 in; height
must be less than 4 in], and we had to use less than 36 inches of balsa wood.

Test Truss
1

After we put our truss into the machine, and we started it, we started to notice how much
of a load the truss was keeping. After a couple of minutes, when the load had reached to 51 lbs,
we immediately heard a loud snap in the truss and had discovered where it had broken. At the
intersection of ACD, the member had been broken of the joint, where there was also a lot of glue.
We realized that the truss broke at that particular joint because we had not properly assembled
that member. In a last minute rush, we had just cut the member into a rectangular prism and not
had cut the ends of the member so as to fit perfectly with the joint. We learned that, in the future,
if we are going to work on a much more complicated bridge truss, we would have to double- and
triple-check whether or not the member was properly attached to the joint and the respective
gusset. At the end, we calculated the efficiency to be 400,300%, which is a relatively good
efficiency.

Research Results
Roof trusses are great tools in construction. They save upto 25% in construction time and
labor costs. They are used in all sorts of places; agricultural, residential, commercial, etc. Roof
Trusses are used in new constructions or in add-on additions. They come, basically, in 2 types:
pitched and chord. Pitched roof trusses, or common trusses, are well known for their triangular
shape. while chord trusses are determined by their span, load and spacing.

Design Idea

Total length of materials: 36 in

Decision Process
Final Idea (Nathans):

Owens idea was much more complicated than the ones that Nathan and I had designed. It used a
lot more members and had too many angles to finish the truss within the projected time and test
it. Although the truss did balance the load very well, the truss design was too complex and
therefore would take too much time to construct.
Nathans idea (the one pictured above) was the simplest of all of ours. His design satisfied the
static determinacy equation to the smallest number of members and joints. The angles were also
not to obscure to measure. The truss was relatively easy to construct. Even though his design did
not balance the load well, his design was the easiest to construct. As a result, we decided to select
his design.
For our decision matrix, we decided to use simplicity, efficiency, cost, cleanliness, and time as
our criteria. We used simplicity to quantify the amount of effort it would require to construct the
truss. We used cost and cleanliness to define the amount of material we would use and how much
of the material, including the glue, would be expended during construction. Finally, we used
efficiency as a criteria because it was defined in the rubric, and because it would be required in
any real-world application.
After we voted for each idea, the results were me, 13, Nathan, 15, and Owen with 10. The winner
was Nathan. We used a scale of 1-4; 1 being the lowest and 4 being the highest.

Official Test Results

Once we placed the truss in the machine, and the machine started, we could see that the force
was going more on the exterior than in the interior, until the wood snapped. Just before it
snapped, we could see a little bit of bending at the bottom and on the sides. However, the
maximum force the truss could hold was only 39 lbs, with an efficiency of 520,000%.

Teamwork
Owen was with the group in the beginning. He was present when we had to come up with our
own trusses and decide on which one to use. Although he finished his truss design a little bit late,
he had finished it in time to decide. However, the day after we had decided that the design we
would construct would be Nathans, the day when we started constructing, he was not present.
Moreover, he had attempted to communicate with me and Nathan that he would be absent the
next day, but the email had not reached us.
Nathan was present all the days for the project. He was the one whose design was selected to
construct and test. Although he took over constructing the truss, and left me with only the gussets
and applying them onto the truss, even when I wanted to help him with the construction, he was
a very knowledgable person. I enjoyed working with him.
I was present all the days that we had for constructing the truss. I helped Nathan with the
construction of the truss whenever I had to, but my main job was to construct and attach the
gussets, which I did so dutifully. However, I may not have communicated my need for the
dimensions of Nathans truss probably, even though I had told him to email me the dimensions a
number of times.

Reflection
1. The fracture occurred where it had because we realized that there was a chip in
the wood at that exact point of fracture. We had not properly assembled the members, and
that resulted in the chip and therefore the fracture of the truss. It did not because the
calculations stated that it was supposed to be uniformly distributed externally.
2. If we could revise our design, we would fix the member assembly by properly
crafting the member to fit in the angled groove. We would also fix the gussets so that it
also fits perfectly on the joints instead of hanging over the joints.

Bibliography
N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Dec. 2015.
http://www.midwestmanufacturing.com/MidwestManufacturing/productType.do?
groupId=3&productTypeId=17

"Wood Truss & Wall Panels." Roof Truss Facts. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Dec. 2015.