Professional Documents
Culture Documents
MMSTC
Mr. May
Andrzejewski - Le - Pretzer 2
Table of Contents
❖ Summary………………………………………………………………………………….. 3
❖ Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..4
❖ Body……………………………………………………………………………………….5
❖ Testing……………………………………………………………………………..8
❖ Results……………………………………………………………………………10
❖ Acknowledgments………………………………………………………………………..12
❖ Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………….. 13
❖ Appendix A: Schedule…………………………………………………………………... 14
❖ Appendix B: Journal…………………………………………………………………….. 15
Summary
For the 2019 Deck Arch Truss Bridge Challenge, the team has been working to make a
sturdy deck arch truss bridge that holds vastly greater weight than that of its own. The prototype
was designed, built, and tested in eight days over a span of two weeks to meet the competition
requirements. The process was delayed and interrupted many times due to snow days. The first
step to make the bridge is to make the arch to build the sides around. It was decided to make an
arch 16.5” wide and 4” tall. A triangular truss spanning 19” is connected to the top of the arch
and vertical supports are added every 1.25” form the ends until it is 3.25” from the center. The
two sides are connected with horizontal 3” pieces of balsa wood on top and on the very bottom at
the points where the bridge will be touching the testing block. Additional cross supports are
added to the vertical supports and 2.5” more inward to help distribute the weight. After the
bridge was built, it was tested on a testing apparatus made by one of the classes at MMSTC.
Andrzejewski - Le - Pretzer 4
Introduction
Purpose: Because of our participation in the 2016 Vertical Lift Bridge Competition, and our
previous name, Tough Pretzels, we decided to name our team Tough Pretzels 2.0 in
Background: Attends Sterling Heights High School and MMSTC. Currently the lead
programmer on FRC Team 818 (experience with various software and CAD)
Background: Attends Cousino High School and MMSTC. Previously on robotics Team 818
Background: Attends Cousino High School and MMSTC. Currently on robotics Team 818
Body
To begin designing a deck arch truss bridge, the team had to find the definition of what
this specific bridge is. We went onto pghbridges.com to find the definition of a deck arch truss
bridge, which is a bridge that uses “vertical members to transmit the load which is carried by the
arch” (Bridge Basics). The team noticed that other teams were using diagonal supports, which
would make the bridge a cantilever bridge. We were not sure if diagonal supports are allowed, so
only vertical supports were used to be safe. The design of the bridge was built around an arch
spanning 16.5” and 4” high. A triangular truss measuring 1” tall and 19” wide is connected to the
top of the arch. Each triangle has a height and base of 1”. Triangle trusses were used in the
bridge because triangles are very efficient in distributing the weight. Fewer joints in the support
structure would provide fewer points of possible failures, so cross supports were not used here.
Vertical supports are then added every 1.25” form the ends until it is 3.25” from the center to
connect the arch to the truss. Diagonal supports are added to the very ends which connect 2 of
the vertical supports. The sides are connected with horizontal 3” pieces of balsa wood on top and
on the very bottom at the points where the bridge will be touching the testing block. The top
pieces are held in place with four 19” pieces of balsa wood spaced one inch apart. To help
distribute the weight, additional cross supports are added to where the vertical supports are and
ever 1.25” in for 2.5”. These crosses are not four separate segments, but are two pieces that form
a cross, but do not actually touch. The exception to the crosses are the very ends, where there are
two crosses instead of just one. This design was based roughly off of the New River Gorge
Bridge in West Virginia. The drawings of the bridge design are provided in Appendix C.
Andrzejewski - Le - Pretzer 6
Due to time constraints, we weren’t able to test multiple designs of our bridge prototype,
During the building process, we measured out the necessary lengths for each portion of
our bridge frame and glued all of the pieces together on a large sheet of cardboard. Each piece
was held in place when drying with pins to ensure the placement of each wood beam was
precise. To create the arch, we wet a full piece of balsa wood, bent it into shape, and pinned it
down. Those pins are removed when the vertical supports are glued in to maintain the shape.
The figure above shows the frame from one of the sides of the bridge. The frame was
constructed by first drawing out the design onto a piece of cardboard and then by pinning and
gluing the pieces together. The pins were just used to hold the pieces of wood in place while they
dried.
Andrzejewski - Le - Pretzer 7
The triangular supports can be seen in Figure 2 above. Triangular supports were added
above the arch to ensure a great amount of weight dispersion when testing the bridge. During this
phase of construction, we ran into problems when gluing our pieces together, as the frame would
stick to the cardboard relatively easy and had to be pried off with a tool each time something was
to be added.
The final phase of construction consisted of building the top of the bridge and connecting
the two side frames together. Once this was accomplished, internal cross supports were then
added throughout the inner portion of the bridge to ensure extra support, as shown in Figure 3
above.
Andrzejewski - Le - Pretzer 8
Testing:
With the bridge designed and built, we move onto the testing phase. We first measured
the mass of the bridge on a scale. The constructed bridge weighed 32.9 grams or 0.0329
kilograms. This number will be used later to calculate the ratio of how much the bridge held until
breaking and the bridge’s mass. The bridge is then placed onto the testing apparatus shown
below.
The figure above shows the bridge constructed placed onto a testing apparatus. This
testing apparatus was made by students in Mr. May’s class at MMSTC. The portion the bridge
sits on was made to fit the specifications detailed in the rules and guidelines. Not shown in the
Once placed onto the testing apparatus, the metal rod is placed through the center of the
bridge and a 16” wood block is secured with a washer and wingnut. A bucket is then connected
Andrzejewski - Le - Pretzer 9
to the bottom end of the rod with a carabiner. The testers wear safety glasses in order to protect
their eyes if any stray balsa wood is launched when the bridge collapses. One of the team
members records the bridge while another member slowly pours sand into the attached bucket.
Sand is continually added until any part of the bridge breaks. The bridge was able to hold the
first bucket when it was filled with sand, so the team members had to switch to a larger bucket.
At one point, the bridge started to creak, so the members left the bridge alone to see if it would
The figure above shows the bridge after it had collapsed under the weight of the sand.
The team members noticed that only the very last fifth of the bridge collapsed so they observed
the broken parts. They saw that the glue on some of the supports had not fully dried, so they
After the collapse, the bucket of sand, the wood block, and all of the fasteners are weighed to get
the hold/mass ratio. The final weight held by the bridge is 44.106 pounds.
Andrzejewski - Le - Pretzer 10
Results:
Currently, the mass of the bridge and the weight the bridge held is in different units, so
the weight held is converted from pounds to kilograms using the following equation:
The equation above shows that one kilogram is equal to one pound divided by 2.2046.
The mass that the bridge held is 20.006 kilogram. The hold/weight ratio can be found with the
following equation:
The equation above shows that the ratio was calculated by dividing the mass that the bridge was
able to hold by the mass of the bridge. The ratio calculated for our bridge was 608.1, indicating
In conclusion, the test bridge we made was a definite success. The bridge was able to
hold 608.1 times its own weight and turned out incredibly structurally sound. Most other teams
in our school had a ratio of around 300 to 400. Throughout the design and build processes, we
learned about weight distribution through different structures and shapes, and how to apply what
we had learned to our final bridge design. In the next iteration of our bridge, we would like to
add an additional arch in the center to help re-distribute the weight into the support blocks, and
we would add another truss onto the arch which would help again to re-distribute the weight into
the sides of the testing block so that not all of the force is pushing directly down on the structure.
We would also design the bridge with less horizontal braces, as many did not add to the
structural integrity of the overall bridge and added additional weight. This is why they were
removed from the final design. An important thing to remember is to wait at least an hour after
gluing to make sure the glue is dry before testing the bridge.
Andrzejewski - Le - Pretzer 12
Acknowledgments
The Tough Pretzels 2.0 would like to thank our Interdisciplinary Studies teacher, Mr.
May, for providing time to construct and design the bridge during the class period and for
providing any additional tools required for the construction process, including a heat gun, pins,
rulers and meter sticks, and snips. We would also like to thank the Junior class for constructing
the testing apparatus for the groups participating in the 2019 MDot Deck Arch Truss Bridge
Competition.
Andrzejewski - Le - Pretzer 13
Bibliography
“Bridge Basics.” Bridge Basics - A Spotter's Guide to Bridge Design, Bruce S. Cridlebaugh,
pghbridges.com/basics.htm
151-9623_38029_38059_41397---,00.html>.
Andrzejewski - Le - Pretzer 14
Appendix A: Schedule
Figure 6, above, shows our initial planned schedule for the competition, although this
schedule was ultimately changed due to snow days we had encountered. The build and testing
processes ended up being delayed by approximately two days. All of the team members were
able to attend every meeting except for Sam, who had missed the meetup held on the 18th of
Appendix B: Journal
Comments
Date Description
Brian Sam Duane
Began brainstorming bridge Vertical or diagonal Have a truss on the
Triangle or cross
2/7 ideas and read through the supports on the bottom of the arch or
trusses?
manual. sides? not?
The “Cross Section” referenced above represents one of multiple cross supports throughout the
bridge. These supports were placed every 1.25” along the bridge alongside the vertical supports
and travelled from the point at which they connect to the arch to the very top of the bridge.