Trusses - Part Two

How a truss works

By building a truss from narrow metal strips a
very strong and light structure can be built.
Many different types of truss have been used.
One advantage of a truss is that it can be
assembled in a convenient position and moved
into position as a complete unit. This is not
always possible. The suspended spans of the
Firth of Forth railway bridge were built as
cantilevers and joined as trusses when the
halves met. The two suspended spans look
rather small by comparison with the rest of the
bridge, but they are actually 107 m long, which
was a sizeable span at the time.
Bicycle frames are simple examples of
triangulated frames. The bicycle is a superb
machine, which can carry many times its own
weight.
How does a truss work? The
diagrams below give a simple
explanation. The top diagram
shows a simple beam jutting out
from a support. The green vectors
represent the weight of the bean,
and the upthrust from the support,
which are equal and opposite. The
red forces are needed to prevent
the green forces from rotating the
beam. (See the page about
Moments) At the top left, the
resultant of green and red is a
sloping line, and in fact the beam
is in tension at that point. At
bottom left the resultant is again
sloping, but here the beam is in
compression. Throughout the
beam the forces are generally not
parallel to the axes of the beam.

===

In the lower pair of diagrams, most of the material has been removed. The loads are
carried by specially designed members - thick struts for compression, and narrow for
tension. The difference in thickness arises because a strut is inherently unstable -
increasing the tends to bend it more. Tension members tend to straighten under
load.
These diagrams apply to a trussed cantilever. Now look at the diagram below, which
shows one half of a trussed beam.

Again the weight is shown as acting at one point. Again the weight and the support
are attempting to rotate the structure, resisted by the forces shown in colour.
Ignoring some of the members, we can trace a route (red for compression) from the
centre to the support. The three red members are akin to a flat arch. With this arch
as a support, we can trace a route for the tension along the blue route. If we now
allow for the presence of the other four members, we can see that the forces will be
shared out among all the members, but the general idea is the same - a beam
includes elements of arch and suspension.

To calculate the forces in all the parts, we could write equations for each connection
point. At each point, the sum of the vertical components of the forces must be zero,
or it would move. Likewise for the two horizontal directions. So we have three
equations per node. If the structure is "perfect" (having no unnecessary parts) the
equations can be solved uniquely. Thus, although the truss looks complicated, we
can in some ways understand it more easily than we can understand a beam.

You can now see that the imaginary bridge at the top of the page has not been drawn
properly: it should have had the thick part at the top, and the thin part at the
bottom. Of course, the lower part would have to be thickened to take the local loads
of the train.

The directions of the members need not
follow the lines of force of the original
beam, because the forces are
constrained to lie entirely in the struts.
The design can be optimised for
lightness, strength and economy. For a
small structure it may be cheaper to
have a repetition of parts, rather than go
for a fully optimised design. For the
same reason small aircraft often have
parallel wings rather than the more
efficient tapered ones, and the ideal
elliptical shape is very seldom used. The
Supermarine Spitfire had elliptical wings,
which must have increased the cost
significantly. The Hawker Hurricane was
cheaper, and also very effective, as was
the Bf109.
Many trusses use triangular
arrangements, because this makes for
rigidity. The joints, whether welded or
riveted, must not be relied upon to
provide rigidity, which is already inherent
in the triangles. In principle, all the
joints could be hinged.
One advantage of a truss is that it can be
built as a complete unit and then lifted or
translated into place. The absence of
falsework removes the need for
interruption to traffic below, except at the
time of installation. The truss is
therefore ideal as a replacement span
over railways and roads.

The construction of a gate is in principle a simple matter, but

there are practical difficulties. The gate must be wide enough
for large farm equipment. This has two consequences. Firstly,
the gate requires at least one diagonal member to maintain its
rectangular shape, making it a trussed cantilever, and secondly, it is hard to keep the
supporting post vertical, because of the large moment of the weight. The post will
usually be anchored in soil, and a large expenditure on a foundation is hard to
justify. Consequently, these gates often droop over a period of years, a behaviour
which is exacerbated by people, usually tourists, who lean on them and climb over
them, often at the end furthest from the hinges, where the moment is greatest.
 Here is section of the jib of a crane. The panels are not precisely
composed of triangles, but the difference is unimportant. What is more
interesting is that the pitch of the panels in the two dimensions is different. Why do
you think this was done? What is the effect?

The Severn bridge at Upton-on-Severn comprises two plate

girders joined by cross-bracing. Triangulation ensures rigidity,
but is much lighter than a load-bearing truss. Note also the
footpath cantilevered out on brackets - well, that's what cantilevers are.

Developing a Beam into a Truss

At the bottom of the picture the diagram represents a simple plate girder. In the
next diagram some attempt has been made to shape it to suit the bending
moments. In the third diagram this is taken further, and in the fourth picture the
structure is greatly lightened by changing it into a truss. Finally, at the top, we see
a tied arch or bowstring arch.

The point is to get the material as far from the neutral axis as possible in order to
oppose the bending moment. Material near the neutral axis isn't doing anything
useful in this context. For a tension member, of course, you might as well use a
wire as a tube, unless the member is very long and in danger of vibrating.

Here is another way of developing a beam into a truss.

 The point is illustrated by this picture of a footbridge across a canal in
Birmingham.

Trusses do not always taper as much as the example shown above: we have to
remember that they carry live loads. The suspended spans of the Forth rail bridge
and the Quebec bridge are good examples of curved trusses. Both girders would
have been sizable bridges in their own right when built.

These shapes are discussed in the page about beams.

The process of lightening a structure can be taken a stage further. The tension
members of the Forth rail bridge are themselves made in the form of trusses. In
principle this process of subdivision could go on for ever, resulting in a fractal
structure. But economic considerations render this absurd. Biological systems, with
their different constraints, can evolve efficient structures that engineers could not
consider, provided that for each stage of the process, the organism has a higher
probability of producing viable offspring as a result. Evolution cannot pass through
stages of lower efficiency to reach higher ones, just as a river cannot cross a ridge
to reach a deeper valley.

These two pictures show the cantilever bridge in Quebec.

Because of the great size of the bridge, a large proportion of
the members are trusses, some of them substantial structures in their
own right. The central truss is a bridge in its own right. Although it appears to be
continuous with the cantilevers, this is an illusion fostered by short top members
which are structurally not really needed. The pictures are about forty years old, and
the colours have changed badly. No more cantilever bridges were built on this
gigantic scale.
For comparison -

Forth bridge
main span 1700 feet/518 m - suspended span 350 feet/107 m
Quebec bridge
main span 1800 feet/549 m - suspended span 640 feet195 m.

The suspended span of the Quebec bridge weights 5200 tons: remember that its
supports are 580 feet/177 m from the feet of the cantilevers. Compare this with
the small balsa trusses that are entered into competitions: a load : weight ratio of
over 2000 : 1 has been achieved. It's all a matter of scale. As another page shows,
there is a limit to bridge spans at which they can only just hold themselves up, with
nothing in hand for a load.

The ladder of this rescue vehicle can be a very light truss,

because the rigidity is provided by the box section cantilever.
All the ladder has to do is support a few people. Note also the
strong box section outriggers that provide stability. Together
with the chassis, these form a bridge that carries the machinery when a
rescue is in progress.

In the early days of the American railroads, when it was necessary to build many
bridges as cheaply and simply as possible, a vast number of trusses was built. Many
different trusses were invented.

When the Wright brothers built the famous Flyer, they braced the two pairs of wings
together with truss-like arrangements of struts and wires, which became the
standard structure for many years.

The diagram below shows bridges constructed as separate spans and as a continuous
truss. What are the advantages and disadvantages of each type?
The third diagram shows two higher spans for navigation below.

When we see an apparently complicated network of struts, can we work out why
each one is there, and why no others are there? Two different questions can be
asked. Firstly, what is the simplest arrangement that will make the construction
rigid? Secondly, which members are in tension and which in compression?

Looking at the second question, we could ask, thirdly, does each member remain
always in tension or always in compression as a live load moves across the bridge?

Let's see if we can answer these questions.

If we want to find out which members are in tension and which in compression, we
can often get somewhere by imagining them made of something like stiff rubber,
that can change visibly when stressed. A member in tension will tend to stretch. A
member in compression will tend to shrink.

Or we can imagine a normal rigid bridge, and then imagine removing one member.
By working out what would happen we can see whether the member was in tension
or in compression.

This has been done in two of the diagrams below. What can you tell about the
missing members?

---

Some Shapes for Trusses

Here are some possible shapes for trusses.

The middle three are shapes for trussed beams that have been commonly used; they
include the bowstring truss and the lenticular truss. These shapes show how the
different types of bridge are not rigidly distinct: the bowstring truss is related to the
tied arch, and its inverse is related to the self-anchored suspension bridge. This
shape has lower clearance below the deck than the bowstring, which can be a
disadvantage. The two outside those are not practical shapes, but the lowest type
truss has been used many times for two-pinned arches, such as the one in Newcastle
and and magnificent ones by Eiffel. The top shape is weird, but if you look at a
picture of the Tower bridge, also rather weird, you will see the similarity. Note that
the details of individual trusses may vary greatly, and many trusses will not include
all the cross-members shown here.

Click here to see a picture of a lenticular truss.

More ideas are shown below. Allowing for the removal of redundant members, and
other modifications, you can see resemblances to Telford's iron arches and Sydney
Harbour bridge, for example.

Here are some types of truss which are sometimes used for the main spans of multi-
span bridges. Again, designers will usually omit some of the members that are
included here.

The next diagram shows a method of creating a long span with high clearance.

This idea can be simply adapted to create an arch.

The next diagram shows the same design with redundant members removed. See
also Indeterminacy.

All these main spans with through connection to the side spans can in principle be
constructed by cantilevering, keeping the navigation channel clear at all times. The
next diagram shows the two sides at different stages of construction.

Now let's colour some of the members in red for compression and blue for tension.

But what happens when the two halves meet, and we complete the top and bottom
chords? We could arrange over-size rivet holes and join the two parts, retaining the
existing forces, but that is not the usual way. By jacking the bottom chords apart,
the span is turned into an arch, relieving the tension at the two outer piers, and
creating outward thrust at the main abutments. But there is still the top chord.
That, too, can be jacked, until it is in compression and not tension.

Can we still confidently assign blue and red to the vertical and sloping members?
What we learn from this thought experiment is that we cannot always, just by looking
at a structure, know even qualitatively what all the parts are doing. In fact, it is
quite possible to construct in such a way that we cannot fully understand even by
calculation. This can happen if we include more members than are strictly necessary,
so that we cannot know how the forces are shared among the load paths. See
also Indeterminacy.

This link - Design a truss - will enable you to design your own truss bridge and find
out the forces in it.

Here are some truss arches in Glasgow.

This picture shows a typical small tower for antennas. Three is the
smallest number of legs that will produce rigidity in all directions,
and three is the number provided. These legs are always in
compression, unless some catastrophe is about to happen. But all
the remaining members may act as either struts or ties,
depending on the strength and direction of the wind. The green
lines show the position of some of the main cross members.
When these are in compression they may fail by buckling, so
subsidiary connections are made, shown in red. The third dimension is catered for by
the horizontal triangles shown in yellow.

Not many people when travelling would think of electricity pylons as interesting, but
in fact they show a remarkable diversity among different countries, although they are
solutions, often ingenious and elegant, to the same sets of problems. Some are even
two-dimensional, relying on guys for the third dimension. And some antenna towers
are very narrow, relying on guys for overall rigidity, leaving the narrow trusses to
deal with local rigidity.

These railway arches in Berne are trussed, as are the vertical supports and
the deck. Unlike Eiffel's arches, which taper towards the springing, these
taper towards the crown. What does this tell us about the structures?

Magnificent examples of trussed arches were created by Eiffel. These had maximum
depth at the crown, tapering to a point at the springing, and were therefore two-
hinged arches. But transversely they were wide at the bottom and narrow at the top,
to withstand the winds that can blow along the valleys. One of the weaknesses of
the first Tay railway bridge was the use of parallel piers instead of using a straddle.

The Royal Albert Bridge at Saltash,

by Isambard Kingdom Brunel, Engineer

This bridge, opened in 1859, carried the Great Western Railway over the wide and
 deep river Tamar between Devon and Cornwall. It has two main spans of 138 m
each. These illustrate several principles of design, as well as Brunel's ability to find
unusual solutions for problems. The design signals very clearly the principles by
which it works.

The spans were built on land, floated out on pontoons, and raised into position. Each
truss comprises a rather flat tubular arch and a suspension chain, linked by other
members to form a rigid whole, with a suspended deck. The idea is that the outward
pull of the arch is balanced by the inward pull of the chains. This principle has been
used in many large domes, though in those, the restraining chain or cable is at right
angles to the thrust. Each Saltash span weighs 1190 tonnes. Whether you call it a
lenticular truss, a tied arch, or a self-anchored suspension bridge, is unimportant. It
is a work of art.

What is the inscription on the portals of the bridge?

I. K. BRUNEL

ENGINEER

The bridge was Brunel's last design.

Click here to see a picture of a lenticular truss.

.A tube uses material efficiently to make
a strong, rigid member. Tubes are used
extensively in the natural world as well
as in manufactured articles. The veins
of an insect's wing are filled with fluid
under pressure to unfurl the wings after
emergence. Subsequently they provide
a stiff network, designed to allow the
wings to bend in just the ways that
efficient flight demands. Many plant
stems and bones are tubular. The
principle is to get the material as far
from the axis as possible. This
construction resists torsion very well,
and resists bending because the tension
and compression are far apart, providing
a large moment. Other examples in
bridge building are the Forth rail bridge
and the Menai Straits tubular bridge.
It is one thing to say that a tube is the
ideal shape for a compression member, or
strut. It is another thing to implement the
idea. Certainly a tube achieves the ideal
of getting the material as far as possible
from the neutral axis, but a large tube is
not a simple or a cheap thing to make. In
the Forth railway bridge and the Saltash
railway bridge, the tubes were built up by
rivetting many curved plates together.
This was labour intensive. Furthermore, if
a tube is very large it will need internal
circular flanges, and possibly longitudinal
flanges, to stiffen it. It is not easy to
connect these to a tube without
introducing unwanted strains. Click here
for more about tubes.

It is much easier to connect to a plate girder. A similar type of problem with stress
The same problem arises when a tube has to
be connected to another member. Achieving
this it satisfactorily is not easy. Look at a
photograph of the foot of one of the great
towers of the Forth rail bridge. The method
of connecting the tubes of the towers and of
the cantilevers is quite complicated, in order
that the stresses could be transmitted
satisfactorily from the cantilevers to the
piers, and from the piers to the foundations
below. In fact a structure can even be made
weaker by adding "strengthening", if the
additions introduce undue strains, and
therefore stresses, that were not there
before. This can happen if the resulting
structure is over-determined and poorly
constructed.
concentrations occurs in designing the fuselage of a
pressurised aircraft, or the deck of a ship, when
material has to be removed from the ideal tube.
The fuselage of an aircraft has to be pierced by
various holes for doors, windows, wheels,
antennas, and so on. The openings have to be
designed carefully, to prevent stress
concentrations. The Comet 1 airliner suffered
explosive decompression when fatigue, starting at
a hole, resulted in catastrophic spreading of cracks.
This phenomenon is now much better understood,
and all designs would now include measures to
reduce the probability of cracks being generated,
and also measures to prevent their propagation
over long distances in the structure.

.Sharp cornered hatches in the deck of a
ship can result in stress concentrations
which can be the source of cracks, which
can propagate if not stopped. As a result of
considerations about construction, tubes are
not employed very often in bridges. What is
beautiful to the engineer, the aesthete, and
the financier may differ quite strikingly.
Fritz Leonhardt, in his great book "Bridges",
explains the desirability of reaching a
satisfactory resolution of these questions.
Nature does not experience the same constraints as
people. Nature's constraint is that each step in
evolution be attainable from the previous one, and
that it should be a slight improvement in some way.
The improvement need not be one that can be
recognised millions of years later, when the use of
an organ may be completely different from a
previous use. Improvements that require a
temporary set-back, however small, in overall
probability of reproduction, cannot happen.
Evolution has no foresight.

Robert Stephenson completed the Britannia tubular bridge over the Menai Strait in
1850, by driving the last rivet himself. Like the Saltash bridge, it has two spans that
were floated across the river and raised into position. Stephenson was able to use an
idea that was not possible with Brunel's design. The spans were connected together
with a small angle of divergence from a straight line. When they were lowered gently
into their final positions, the induced stresses cancelled some of the unwanted
stresses that a straight beam would have suffered. Stephenson had anticipated
Freysinnet by introducing pre-stressing.

The penalty was paid when the bridge caught fire in 1870. The stresses were
released, and the bridge was no longer usable. The spans were replaced by arches.

It is recorded that Stephenson referred to his bridge as a "magnificent blunder" when

he heard of Roebling's design for a suspension bridge at Niagara. This remark,
though generous, was in fact unfair to himself.

Given the state of knowledge, the Britannia bridge was a good solution to the
problem. To have invented the box-girder and pre-stressing could only have been
done by a great and imaginative engineer. The great tubes were far beyond anything
that had been done before, but Stephenson's research and preparation were
meticulous. In fact, Stephenson's original instinct was right, in that suspension
bridges have seldom been successful for railways.

It was shown that rectangular tubes were stronger than round ones. This may not
seem obvious, but we have to remember that the trains were to run inside the tubes,
which could therefore not have large flanges or diaphragms. Systematic tests were
made, using several different cross-sections on a reduced scale. A circular tube has
the greatest symmetry, and copes perfectly with axially symmetrical stresses such as
torsion and pressure differences. An airliner and a submarine illustrate this well.

But in a bridge, supported at its ends, the symmetry is broken by the vertical
bending moment. A deep section is needed. So why are Brunel's tubes so good?
We must not confuse geometrical symmetry with the symmetry of the stress-flow.
Suppose we create a curved coordinate system that follows the dead-load stress
path. In that space a well-designed arch will appear more-or-less straight. In the
Saltash bridge the bending moments are taken mainly by the truss action, leaving
the tubes to deal with the thrust. A brilliant and beautiful solution.

Let's compare the Saltash spans with the Britannia spans.

Attribute Saltash bridge Britannia bridge

Length of main spans 138 metres 140 metres
Mass of main spans c 1200 tonnes c 1800 tonnes

There it is. Brunel's lighter trusses saved one third of the material costs, and made
lifting into position much easier. Yet in general, would you normally associate Brunel
with economy? He had in fact toyed with this idea twice before, at Windsor and at
Chepstow, so he must have dreamed of it long before starting work at Saltash.

At Windsor the tube had a triangular cross-section. At Chepstow the tubes were
elliptical in cross-section, and some bars were used in a kind of cable-stayed
configuration. On the sides of the deck Brunel embossed curved lines continuing the
lines of these stay-bars, hinting at the suspension aspect of the spans. This bridge
lasted until quite late in the 20th century, when it was replaced by a new bridge.

Why did Brunel not build a simple bowstring arch? The Saltash bridge had to provide
clearance for shipping. It was desirable to have the railway as near as possible to
the bottom of the bridge to miminise gradients on the approaches. The arch had to
be entirely above the railway loading gauge. With horizontal ties, the bridge would
still have required hangers to hold the deck, and bracing for rigidity. By curving the
tie of the arch into a suspension chain, Brunel could use it to help the rigidising
action.

He could have provided a tied arch on each side of the track, but any cross-bracing
would have had to be above the loading gauge.

What are the Saltash spans? Tied arches? Self-anchored suspension bridges?
Trusses? Or something unusual by a great individualist? In the USA a number of
lenticular trusses have been constructed (see links below).

The Saltash tubes are elliptical in cross section - wide enough for the bridge to
accommodate one train, and deep enough to provide the required stiffness, allowing
for the movement of the line of thrust as a heavy train goes over. Internal flanges,
both transverse and longitudinal, increase the stiffness. A good picture of this is
given in "Track Topics", a book for boys of all ages.

An example of the relative weakness of a tube against

bending is seen in the Forth railway bridge. The tubular
lower members can give the illusion of being arches. In fact
the individual sections are straight. To prevent the tubes
from buckling, at about the mid-point of each tube a tie
connects it to the junction of the strut and tie above it. The
unsupported span of the tube is halved, and its resistance to
deflection greatly reduced.

Note that the main tension members of this bridge are trusses, both in the
top chord and within the cantilevers. The railway itself is carried by a truss,
which is a bridge within the bridge. And the suspended spans are large
truss bridges in their own right. The Forth railway bridge is one of those
things which when seen are found to be as impressive as their reputation.

Many suspension bridges have trussed decks for rigidity, a practice which
was emphasised after the Tacoma Narrows collapse. Many years later, the
aerodynamic deck began to be used instead, with saving in weight and cost.

In these pictures we see that that

numerous members are trusses.
The Tour Eiffel is a classic example
of this. In principle the subdivision could go
further, but it would be uneconomic. The economics of
the natural world are completely different, and many layers of subdivision
may be found. In mathematics, where economics has no place, the
existence of fractals demonstrates that infinite subdivision is possible, as in
the Sierpinski gasket. Such plane curves can have a finite area, but infinite
length, and solids can have infinite area with finite volume. And you can
read about facts such as the area of a human lung being equal to that of a
tennis court. If you make a section through a bone from a bird, which has
to be strong and light, you will see the results of millions of years of
evolution. Evolutionary design is one of numerous ways in which people are
beginning to imitate the ways of nature.

.The fuselage of an airliner is Most tunnels are tubular, like submarine

tubular. This gives great strength
to resist many kinds of forces.
The pressure difference between
the inside and the outside
generates large tensions. The
weight tends to bend the front
and rear downwards as they are
cantilevers projecting from the
wings. In fact the fuselage is a
continuous beam, with holes for
doors and windows.
hulls, so resist the immense pressures
around them. Many living structures
are tubular, such as plants stems,
insect limbs, and bones. In the case of
birds, where lightness and strength are
in direct conflict, the interior of the
bones may be stiffened by innumerable
struts, enabling the tube itself to be
thinner without buckling.
.For another very elegant solution using tubes see the section about Hampton bridge.

In the 19th and 20th centuries, many seaside resorts had at least
one truss bridge to nowhere, like this one, photographed on a dull
day in winter. In some cases, small ships could moor at them,
but in others there was only a pleasure hall at the end.

In the 19th century, a number of designers experimented with a variety of

trusses, such as the Howe, Pratt and Whipple trusses. This link is to a
picture of two bridges which combined arch and a truss.

The truss can be expanded into the third dimension to create

many kinds of space frames, which are useful for making light
roofs, often over wide open areas. By curving such a structure
into the third dimension, Buckminster Fuller created spherical forms that
were very light and very rigid. The domes of the Eden Project are good
examples.

Compare the space frame with this

interesting triangular truss bridge over a
canal in Birmingham.

Some trusses are not among the most elegant of bridges. This
one carries a railway across the river Lune. The piers are
asymmetric. Which way is the river flowing?

===Definition of a Truss

After looking at this page, what do you think a truss is? This web-site is not
intended as a text-book, and is not arranged in the logical fashion of a text-
book. Although structures can be classified broadly into different basic
types, in practice, few structures are pure examples.

Let's look at trusses. How's this for a description of a "pure" truss?

A truss is made entirely of straight members that are in pure compression or

tension, all singly pinned at the joints, and constructed in such a way that
removal of one member would allow the structure to deform significantly.
Trussed arches and trussed beams exist, so these pages should be looked at
for further information.

In practice, joints are usually welded, bolted or riveted in such a way that
that the joints confer extra stiffness on the structure.
Many real structures are far from being "pure", but the ideas like "arch",
"beam" and "truss" are useful in learning to understand. Conversely, many
elegant structures have been made by combining features of different
types. Look at some structures and work out what is going on in them.

Near the beginning of the page, a problem was mentioned, a problem that
looms over the simplicity of the truss. What happens at the places where
the parts are joined? All those simple longitudinal forces begin to diverge
from simple straight lines: the price we paid to avoid the complexity of wide
members like beams is to concentrate our difficulties in a few places. To
find out more about this, see Truss Joints.

If you got this far, try a superb game about bridge building -
http://firingsquad.gamers.com/games/pontifex/default.asp.

Here you can design your own truss span.

===