Cover Sheet

2.1.9 Truss Design

Name: Christian Smith
Team Members: Joseph Chieng, Riley McBrearty
POE Block 3
Date: 12/9/15

Problem Statement
I was tasked to design a truss based on our tests and research which performs
better than test trusses. My constraints included only being allowed to use balsa wood,
glue, and paper, my paper gussets couldnt be larger than the gussets used during
testing, and it had to fit in the apparatus that I measured which had to have a span
greater than or equal to 6 inches and a height less than or equal to 4 inches.

Test Truss
Our truss held a maximum of 26 pounds of force applied to it before it cracked
and it broke at the bottom right gusset because of a construction error due to the lack of

hot glue used at that component. I learned on this test truss that making sure the truss
is built correctly as it was designed is very important and just one little error can change
the entire test outcome. I also know now to include more members and keep the
triangular pattern in order for the truss to be able to hold more weight and be stable. Our
test truss weighed 0.00625 pounds and the efficiency was 416,000%.

Research Results
Upon researching various websites, I found that better and more common roof
truss designs had more members, triangular shaped members, and were generally
more symmetrical. I found two fantastic examples of roof trusses at "Roof Truss Terms."
Roof Truss Terms. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Dec. 2015. and "Andrew Fuller." Andrew Fuller. N.p., n.d.
Web. 01 Dec. 2015. that helped me brainstorm an idea of a design of a roof truss that I

could use for our official test of our truss that would be most efficient to build.

Design Idea
The total length of materials that our
truss required was approximately 28.97

inches. Once this design was constructed, we put it on the scale and the weight turned
out to be 0.003125 pounds.

Decision Process
The design idea that Joseph proposed used lots of wood and was very complex.
The advantages to his was that it would be very stable, yet it wouldnt take too long to
create. However, the possibility of going over the limit of 36 inches of balsa wood in our
constraints was very high, making that a key disadvantage. Rileys idea was much less
complex and seemed very easy to build. The advantage to his proposal was that it was
basic and would be efficient and quick to construct. The lack of many supports, though,
reduced the stability and chance of it holding up much weight, creating a disadvantage
to his truss. The criteria we incorporated in our decision matrix included the number of
supports, stability, amount of wood used, complexity/difficulty to build, and the amount
of time it would take to build the truss. These were the most important factors to a
successful truss design for our group and seemed it would be most ideal to create one
which followed these principles. After conversing with each other on whose truss we

should build, we concluded that we would design my idea because everyone in the
group agreed that my idea would fulfill our requirements best as well as the constraints.
Decision Matrix
4=Best 1=Worst
Number of
Supports

Stability

Wood Use

Complexit
y

Build Time

Total

Christian

16

Joseph

15

Riley

16

Official Test
During the official test of our trust, when the machine reached 12 pounds, the
bottom left gusset (actually the bottom right gusset, but this picture was taken on the
other side of the truss) cracked and broke as well as part of member one which
connected to the gusset. As I said previously, the maximum force that our truss could
handle was 12 pounds making the efficiency 384,000%. My test truss ended up being
more efficient than the official test because I incorporated gussets in my test truss and
the creation of the test truss was more cautious than the building of the final truss due to
the tight time constraint.

Teamwork
Riley McBrearty: Rileys role in assembling our truss was to be the builder of the
truss. He measured the length of each member, cut the balsa wood out based on his
measurements, and glued most of the members together. He also came up with multiple
variables that we ended up using for our decision matrix which helped us significantly in
selecting the correct truss design for this project.
Joseph Chieng: Joseph also helped Riley out a little in the creation of our truss
by assembling a few components needed for the truss. But the majority of his
contribution was calculating and getting the necessary information for our truss and
reports. He got the SSA graph of our final truss design, calculated the efficiency of our
truss, and he helped scan the necessary pictures of our truss design for our design
reports.
Christian Smith: I helped out by taking pictures of our truss before and after it
was tested, uploading them, and sharing them with my team members so that we could
use them in our reports. My design idea was also the idea that we ended up using to
construct and test, another obligation that needed to be fulfilled. Finally, I observed our
truss during our test and identified where and how the truss may have broken and how
much weight our truss was able to hold.

Reflection
1. I think that the reason the bottom right intersection between beam one and
beam six broke mainly because we didnt have enough time to apply gussets on

our truss. Another reason it could have broken would be miscalculations of the
length of that side of our truss, causing a construction error. Our truss did snap at
the member that our calculations revealed as undergoing the most stress which
made sense.
2. If I could redesign my truss I would have made sure that the
measurements of each beam member were exactly as calculated in my design
idea. I also would have added more members to make the truss much more
stable than it was because I still had available balsa wood to use that I didnt take
advantage of.