engineering 100: bridge project group 6 (team bacardi) jon honari, kevin lam, otis chantharangsy,...
Post on 21-Dec-2015
214 views
TRANSCRIPT
Engineering 100:Bridge Project
Engineering 100:Bridge Project
Group 6 (Team Bacardi)Jon Honari, Kevin Lam,
Otis Chantharangsy, Ivee Ilao
Group 6 (Team Bacardi)Jon Honari, Kevin Lam,
Otis Chantharangsy, Ivee Ilao
Presentation OutlinePresentation Outline
Design Ideas
Prototype Bridge Process Testing/
Results
Prototype Analysis Flaws Improvements
Design Ideas
Prototype Bridge Process Testing/
Results
Prototype Analysis Flaws Improvements
Final Bridge Design Testing/
results
Final Results Graph Analysis Failures
Conclusion
Final Bridge Design Testing/
results
Final Results Graph Analysis Failures
Conclusion
DesignDesign
Arch Design Proved to be strongest
structure based on our research
Base Flat and straight
Supports Angle supports
Evenly distributed force
Arch Design Proved to be strongest
structure based on our research
Base Flat and straight
Supports Angle supports
Evenly distributed force
Prototype DesignPrototype Design
QuickTime™ and a decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Prototype ProcessPrototype Process
Arch Supports Road Connections Structural
Reinforcements
Arch Supports Road Connections Structural
Reinforcements
Prototype ProcessPrototype Process
Prototype Testing/ResultsPrototype Testing/Results
Prototype AnalysisPrototype Analysis
Flaws Uneven weight
distribution Not supported where
bridge met jigUltimate reason for failure
Weak road Sloppy design Unnecessary weight
Flaws Uneven weight
distribution Not supported where
bridge met jigUltimate reason for failure
Weak road Sloppy design Unnecessary weight
Prototype FlawsPrototype Flaws
Red: Excess Weight Green: Lack of Support
Final DesignFinal Design
Excess weight was removed Top section was more
reinforced Used wood glue instead of
hot glue for the majority Made sure weight was
distributed evenly Reinforced the legs where
the bridge met the jig Added more supports
Excess weight was removed Top section was more
reinforced Used wood glue instead of
hot glue for the majority Made sure weight was
distributed evenly Reinforced the legs where
the bridge met the jig Added more supports
Prototype vs. Final DesignPrototype vs. Final Design
Final Bridge PrototypeFinal Bridge Prototype
Final Design (Completed)Final Design (Completed)
Final Testing/ResultsFinal Testing/Results
Final Design FailureFinal Design Failure
Important joints were overlooked and were not supported correctly
Final AnalysisFinal Analysis
Overall, very good improvement
Bridge weighed 0.59 lbs Bridge held 531.89 lbs Performance = Successful With more supports in the
correct places we believe the bridge could hold much more weight
Overall, very good improvement
Bridge weighed 0.59 lbs Bridge held 531.89 lbs Performance = Successful With more supports in the
correct places we believe the bridge could hold much more weight
We conclude…We conclude…
Spending more time on the construction yielded better results
About 170% improvement High efficiency ratio Endures a high amount of pressure Lasts under consistent amount of low
pressure First Bridge: .56 pounds, held 296.00
lb Final Bridge: .59 pounds, held 531.89
lb
Spending more time on the construction yielded better results
About 170% improvement High efficiency ratio Endures a high amount of pressure Lasts under consistent amount of low
pressure First Bridge: .56 pounds, held 296.00
lb Final Bridge: .59 pounds, held 531.89
lb