De Montfort University

Truss Design using

Finite element
analysis and
MATLAB
ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics

P15219444
12-7-2017
 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Introduction
This report has been written in relation to the proposition given by your firm. This report will show an analysis
of stresses, strain and displacement on a common box section truss widely used in the UK. The analysis will be
completed using MATLAB and FEA analysis. The two configurations you have given in your proposal have been
analysed later on in this report. The requested steel has been given as Mild Steel, Young’s Modulus of
210GPa1, poisons ratio of 0.3032, density of 7.85 g/cm33, Yield strength of 247MPa. Using a box section truss
widely used in the UK, the dimensions used for the truss is 25mm by 50mm 4. The truss design as can be seen
from Fig.1 and Fig.2 for both configurations will consist of a seven element truss design where by two points of
the truss are fixed using pinned supports denying freedom of movement in any direction and one sliding
support which will allow for movement in the vertical axis, this is the case for both configurations which are to
be analysed.

Figure 1: Truss configuration 1 Figure 2: Truss configuration 2

From both Figure 1 and 2 you can see that the forces applied to the truss is 10KN acting in the y-axis.

Material Selection
The material used for specification is mild steel, this is a good material for a truss as it is lighter than concrete,
reducing foundation requirements, therefore reducing the inertia effects. It is easy to be repaired to full
strength regardless if the repair was generated by collision forces, or fatigue stresses. Mild steel is corrosive to
rust, however as the truss is being used indoors, this will not impact the main use of the truss. Ductility and
toughness of material allows absorption of loading well above the design values which contributes to a healthy
factor of safety. Another benefit is that the steel is malleable which allows it to be more flexible in comparison
to other steels, this is good for the company as they can use the truss for other uses as it can be easily drilled
and welded. The cost of mild steel is fairly low in comparison to other steels with similar features. #the high
tensile and impact strength due to the low carbon allows the truss not to shatter or crack under stress.

Elemental stiffness matrix

The Elemental stiffness matrix is a type of FEA used for physical effects that a truss structure is subjected to.
This can be used to determine nodal displacement, stress, strain, and axial displacement. These values are
essential as the truss is a major support in a building and to know how much stress and displacement it can
take will help assess if the configuration is right for its purpose. Major stress points can also be assessed and
reinforced to ensure the truss don’t break. A factor of safety is also useful as good engineering practice.

1
Schoolphysics.co.uk. (2017). schoolphysics ::Welcome::. [online] Available at: http://www.schoolphysics.co.uk/age16-
19/Properties%20of%20matter/Elasticity/text/Elastic_moduli_and_Young_modulus/index.html [Accessed 8 Dec.
2017].
2
Engineeringtoolbox.com. (2017). Poisson's ratio. [online] Available at: https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/poissons-
ratio-d_1224.html [Accessed 8 Dec. 2017].
3
Thyssenkruppaerospace.com. (2017). Weight calculations - Steel sheet & plate - thyssenkrupp Aerospace. [online]
Available at: http://www.thyssenkruppaerospace.com/materials/steel/steel-sheet-plate/weight-

4
Steelexpress.co.uk. (2017). Mild Steel Box Section - RHS - Rectangular Hollow Section. [online] Available at:
http://www.steelexpress.co.uk/structuralsteel/RHS.html [Accessed 8 Dec. 2017].

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics

𝑨𝑬
To calculate this the following equation is used: ∴ 𝐾= Where A= Area, E=Young’s Modulus, L= Length of
𝑳
element. 𝑳 = √(𝒙𝟐 − 𝒙𝟏 )𝟐 + (𝒚𝟐 − 𝒚)𝟐 .

𝑳 = √(𝟎 − 𝟖𝟎𝟎)𝟐 + (𝟎 − 𝟎)𝟐

∴ 𝑳 = 𝟖𝟎𝟎𝒎𝒎
𝑨𝑬
∴
𝑳
𝟏𝟐𝟓𝟎×(𝟐𝟏𝟎×𝟏𝟎𝟗 )
∴
𝟖𝟎𝟎
∴ 𝟑. 𝟐𝟖𝟏 × 𝟏𝟎𝟏𝟏

Configuration 1 Configuration 2

Same as configuration 1 except F

and G.

Configuation 1

Table 1: Discretise

Configuration 2

Same as above except for truss members F and G, see below the changes.

Truss Node Node

Member 1 2 Xi Yi Xj Yj Angle c s L
F 4 5 1400 600 800 0 135 -0.707106781 -0.707106781 848.5281374
G 5 1 800 0 1400 0 0 1 0 600

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Local Matrix
The local matrices are needed for each element. This can be achieved by multiplying the cosine and sine matrix
for each truss member.
Configuration 1

A B C
U1 V1 U2 V2 U2 V2 U3 V3 U3 V3 U4 V4
3.28125E+11 0 -3.3E+11 0 0 0 0 0 3.28125E+11 0 -3.3E+11 0
0 0 0 0 0 4.38E+11 0 -4.4E+11 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -3.2813E+11 0 3.28E+11 0
0 -4.4E+11 0 4.38E+11
-3.2813E+11 0 3.28E+11 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0

D E
U1 V1 U4 V4 U2 V2 U4 V4
0 0 0 0 1.70099E+11 1.25E+11 -1.7E+11 -1.3E+11
0 4.38E+11 0 -4.4E+11
1.25369E+11 9.24E+10 -1.3E+11 -9.2E+10
0 0 0 0
-1.701E+11 -1.3E+11 1.7E+11 1.25E+11
0 -4.4E+11 0 4.38E+11 -1.2537E+11 -9.2E+10 1.25E+11 9.24E+10
F G
U4 V4 U5 V5 U1 V1 U5 V5
4.38E+11 0 -4.4E+11 0 1.5468E+11 1.55E+11 -1.5E+11 -1.5E+11
0 0 0 0 1.5468E+11 1.55E+11 -1.5E+11 -1.5E+11
-4.4E+11 0 4.38E+11 0 -1.5468E+11 -1.5E+11 1.55E+11 1.55E+11
0 0 0 0
-1.5468E+11 -1.5E+11 1.55E+11 1.55E+11

Configuration 2

A B C
U3 V3 U4 V4
U2 V2 U3 V3 3.28125E+11 0 -3.3E+11 0
U1 V1 U2 V2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.28125E+11 0 -3.3E+11 0 4.38E+11 0 -4.4E+11 -3.2813E+11 0 3.28E+11 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-3.2813E+11 0 3.28E+11 0 0 -4.4E+11 0 4.38E+11
0 0 0 0

D E
U1 V1 U4 V4
0 0 0 0

0 4.38E+11 0 -4.4E+11
0 0 0 0
0 -4.4E+11 0 4.38E+11

F G
U4 V4 U5 V5
U1 V1 U5 V5 4.38E+11 0 -4.4E+11 0
1.5468E+11 1.55E+11 -1.5E+11 -1.5E+11 0 0 0 0
1.5468E+11 1.55E+11 -1.5E+11 -1.5E+11 -4.4E+11 0 4.38E+11 0
-1.5468E+11 -1.5E+11 1.55E+11 1.55E+11 0 0 0 0
-1.5468E+11 -1.5E+11 1.55E+11 1.55E+11

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Assembly of Global matrix
Formation 1:
(All values to be multiplied by 1011)
U1 V1 U2 V2 U3 V3 U4 V4 U5 V5
U1 4.8280 1.5468 -3.2813 0 0 0 0 0 -1.5468 -1.5468
V1 1.5468 5.9218 0 0 0 0 0 -4.3750 -1.5468 -1.5468
U2 -3.2813 0 4.9612 1.2600 0 0 -1.6800 -1.2600 0 0
V2 0 0 1.2600 5.3200 0 -4.3750 -1.2600 -0.9450 0 0
U3 0 0 0 0 3.2813 0 -3.2813 0 0 0
V3 0 0 0 -4.3750 0 4.3750 0 0 0 0
U4 0 0 -1.6800 -1.2600 -3.2813 0 9.3362 1.2600 -4.3750 0
V4 0 -4.3750 -1.2600 -0.9450 0 0 1.2600 5.3200 0 0
U5 -1.5468 -1.5468 0 0 0 0 -4.3750 0 5.9218 1.5468
V5 -1.5468 -1.5468 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.5468 1.5468

Formation 2:
(All values to be multiplied by 1011)
U1 V1 U2 V2 U3 V3 U4 V4 U5 V5
U1 7.6563 0 -3.2813 0 0 0 0 0 -4.3750 0
V1 0 4.3750 0 0 0 0 0 -4.3750 0 0
U2 -3.2813 0 4.9612 1.2600 0 0 -1.6800 -1.2600 0 0
V2 0 0 1.2600 5.3200 0 -4.3750 -1.2600 -0.9450 0 0
U3 0 0 0 0 3.2813 0 -3.2813 0 0 0
V3 0 0 0 -4.3750 0 4.3750 0 0 0 0
U4 0 0 -1.6800 -1.2600 -3.2813 0 6.5080 -0.2868 -1.5468 1.5468
V4 0 -4.3750 -1.2600 -0.9450 0 0 -0.2868 6.8668 1.5468 -1.5468
U5 -4.3750 0 0 0 0 0 -1.5468 1.5468 5.9218 -1.5468
V5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.5468 -1.5468 -1.5468 1.5468

Boundary Conditions and loads

The fixed pinned boundaries and sliding boundaries applied on both configurations are the same, they are
shown in figure 1, 2, 3 and 3b. The pinned boundaries means all translational degrees of freedom have
constraints; these boundaries have a degree of freedom of 0. For a 2D common truss, the degree of freedom is
usually 2, these are in the x and y axis. The loads applied in both configurations are the same, 10KN, however,
the direction of them are different. In figure 3a, it can be seen that the load is applied in the y direction at
node 5. In figure 3b, the load is applied in the –y direction at load 5.

4 5
3

10KN

2 1

Figure 3a: Boundary conditions and loads applied to configuration 1

Fixed Boundary condition

Sliding Boundary condition

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics

10KN

Figure 3b: Boundary conditions and loads applied to configuration 2

Table 2 and 3 shows the degrees of freedom in each truss member:

Truss Member Degrees of freedom

A 1
B 0
C 0
D 0
E 0
F 0
G 2
Table 3: Degree of freedom for configuration 1 Table 4: Degree of freedom for configuration 2

Governing equation
F= K × U, where F= Force, K= spring constant, U= Displacement.
This equation will allow the displacement, U, to be found. Most of the forces, F, will either be zero or known.
Usually the K, would be a spring constant but in this case it will be the square matrix. The equation will be used
seven times for each element. The mesh also illustrates this as the mesh was run using 7 elements, one seed
per line.
Configuration 1

U1
4.82805E+11 1.55E+11 0 -1.5E+11 -1.5E+11 0
V1
1.5468E+11 5.92E+11 0 -1.5E+11 -1.5E+11 0
x
0 0 5.3E+11 0 0 0 = V2
U5
-1.5468E+11 -1.5E+11 0 5.92E+11 1.55E+11 0
V5
-1.5468E+11 -1.5E+11 0 1.55E+11 1.55E+11 0

Configuration 2

3.04762E-12 -1.1E-28 0 1.15E-28 3.05E-12 0 U1

-2.04603E-28 2.29E-12 0 1.02E-28 2.29E-12 0 V1

0 0 1.89E-12 0 0 x 0 = V2

1.06291E-28 5.31E-29 0 2.29E-12 -2.3E-12 0 U5

3.04762E-12 2.29E-12 0 -2.3E-12 1.41E-11 -10000 V5

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics

The nodal displacement has been calculated:

U1
V1
V2 ×
U5
V5

Results
For the node numbers and their associated truss members please refer to figure

Configuration 1 Configuration 2
Truss Member
Nodal Displacement (1.0e-006) Nodal Displacement (1.0e-006)
Nodes
x y x y
1 -3.01762e-08 -2.28571e-08 -3.04794e-10 0
2 -0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0
5 2.28571e-08 -1.4084e-07 -5.33321e-10 -1.17969e-09
Table 2a: Nodal displacements for both truss configuration from MATLAB

Truss Member Configuration 1 Configuration 2 The use of cosine and sine of each truss
Nodes Elemental Strain Elemental Stress member and multiplying them by the
A -3.80952e-11 -8 nodal displacement. Then to work out
B 0 0 strain we use the formula:
C 0 0 d2 − d1
Strain, ϵ =
D 3.80952e-11 0 L
E 0 0
Stress, σ = E × Strain
F 3.810-11 11.3137
G -5.387e-11 -8
Table 3b: Elemental strain from configuration 1 and elemental stress from configuration 2 from MATLAB

MATLAB programming
MATLAB is used to calculate equations and calculations that would be time consuming if worked by hand.
Below is the MATLAB code which was used to determine the global stiffness matrix, nodal displacements,
strain and stresses for all elements.

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics

Configuration 1 Results

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Configuration 2 Results

FEA approach
Finite Element Analysis is useful for finding and solving potential structural or performance issues with the
design. It is mathematically modelled and it will numerically solve very complex problems.

The general purpose ABAQUS finite element code was selected for the current study. Information from
previous studies indicated that, for high rate dynamic loads, ABAQUS performed better than other
commercially available finite element codes as per a study conducted by Krauthammer 5. Finite element
models were validated by comparing results to MATLAB results

The force has been added to node 5, using figure 3a, of 10KN in the y-axis. Two pinned boundary conditions
and one sliding bounding condition have been added too. Refer to figure 1 and 2, for the exact locations.

5
Krauthammer T, Lim J, Oh GJ. Findings from three computer code validations with precision impact test data. Proceedings
of the 29th Department of Defense Explosive Safety Seminar, New Orleans, LA; 2000. p. 18–20.

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Configuration 1

Figure 3a above shows the truss structure where the loads and boundary conditions have been added.

Figure 3: Seed elements before the model was meshed for configuration 1

Figure 4 Stress for configuration 1

Figure 5 strain for configuration 1

Figure 6 displacement magnitude for configuration 1

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Configuration 2
Refer to figure 3b for truss structure, loads and boundary conditions for configuration 2.

Figure 7: FEA analysis showing the stress on configuration 2

Figure 8: FEA analysis showing the strain on configuration 2

Figure 9: FEA analysis showing displacement for configuration 2

Configuration 1 Configuration 2 Difference % difference from config 1

Stress 9.657 11.31 1.653 17.67
Strain 3.81e-11 5.387e-11 1.577 41.39
Displacement 1.427e-07 1.295e-07 -0.132 -9.25
Table 4: Difference in stress, strain and displacement using abaqus

Configuration 1 Configuration 2
Truss Member
Nodal Displacement Nodal Displacement
Nodes
x y x y
1 -3.01762e-08 -2.28571e-08 -3.04794e-10 -1e-32 ≈ 0
2 -1e-32 ≈ 0 2.96053e-33 ≈ 0 -1e-32 ≈ 0 2.96242e-33 ≈ 0
3 0 0 0 0
4 1e-32 ≈ 0 -1e-32 ≈ 0 1e-32 ≈ 0 -1e-32 ≈ 0
5 2.28571e-08 -1.4084e-07 -5.33321e-10 -1.17969e-09
Table 5b: Nodal displacement via abaqus

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics

Truss Member Configuration 1 Configuration 2 Configuration 1 Configuration 2

Nodes Elemental Strain Elemental Strain Elemental Stress Elemental Stress
A 0 0 8 8
B 0 0 1.03618e-24 0
C 1.25e-35 1.25e-35 2.625e-24 0
D 3.80952e-11 0 8 0
E 8.22368e-36 8.22368e-36 1.72697e-24 0
F 3.80952e-11 0.538748 8 11.3137
G 0 0 11.3137 -8
Table 6: Stress and strain from abaqus

Table 5 shows the differences in stress, strain and displacement using FEA analysis. FEA analysis is as accurate
as the mesh elements. Using figure 3, the mesh elements are determines as 7 elements, one per edge. This is
suitable enough for an analysis as the analysis was produced using a 2D truss. From figures 6, the displacement
for configuration 1 under the 10KN force is given as 1.427e-07m. This displacement figure is nominal,
0.001427mm in comparison to the height of the truss being 600mm. This displacement is 0.0001% of the
height, which suggest that the truss barely moves. This is really good, as it ensures the truss has a long life with
low maintenance, it allows the desired load to be applied without deforming the truss and risk of fatigue
failure. However, with this being said, as the displacement is zero, it will cost the firm unnecessary cost and
resources as the truss is too good for its purpose of taking a load of 10KN. As mentioned in your proposal you
would like to reduce the weight and cross sectional area of the truss members. This therefore means that the
truss simulated in this report will not be a viable resolution for your purpose. However, the values can be
scaled down to see the optimum cross section area.

Advantages and disadvantages of MATLAB and FEA

Advantages Disadvantages
Abaqus  Can easily see where the max stress etc  Time consuming to simulate and data check
(FEA) occurs on the part via visualisation  The software is quite costly
 Changes can easily be made to loads, 
length etc

MATLAB  Code is easily available online and can  Not as accurate as FEA, cannot define mesh,
be adjusted where required or set boundary conditions
 Results in MATLAB are easy to read and  Unable to show visual representation as
graphs and tables are plotted opposed to FEA
 Errors are shown per line, so it is easy to  Coding knowledge is needed to operate
troubleshoot MATLAB
Table 7: Advantages and disadvantages of using MATLAB in comparison to FEA

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Although Table 6 shows the comparison between MATLAB and abaqus, both software have the same benefits
in comparison to other method such as creating a prototype. A major advantage of using simulation software
is that is has major cost benefits to companies. As the software is able to see where the issue is and where a
potential problem may lay, this saves money in creating a prototype, and then realising that a minor issue has
caused the whole prototype to become useless. Using software has resource benefits, as less resources are
needed to create prototypes. A prototype will only be created after full analysis has been created using FEA or
MATLAB. As the software is easy to work with and has a user friendly interface, people with less skills are able
to use and simulate the programme. Less skills in comparison to creating a prototype. Time is also another key
benefit using a software. This is because it take quire a considerable amount of time to create a prototype, and
if there is an issue with the prototype, you have to start again so the time wasted creating the first prototype is
wasted.

All the points mentioned above; less skills, less resources, less time, leads to less cost. This outweighs the
disadvantages of using simulation software. However, a prototype will be best used to see any problems that
might arise, either physically or aesthetically, as experiments always have different values in comparison to
calculated (simulated) results.

Other methods can also be used for a full in-depth analysis, such as Fault Tree Analysis (FTA). This is a top
down approach to help identify potential causes of system failures before the failure occurs.

Factor of Safety
𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠
𝑠𝑓 =
𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑠

247 247
𝑠𝑓𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑓𝑖𝑔 1 = = 25.57 𝑠𝑓𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑓𝑖𝑔 2 = = 21.83
9.657 11.31

The factor of safety allows there to be a contingency if loads were to increase, or as a measurement of safety.
As the truss is being placed overhead, a high level of factor of safety will be needed as any risks or mishaps
might be prevented due to the safety factor. If the truss breaks or cracks, it will have a major impact on all
personnel under the truss.

As the purpose of the truss is to be used as a pulley, with no further information provided in your proposal, I
am assuming the worst case scenario, in that it is being used to carry people. This assumption increases the
level of legislation that has to be dealt with, in turn increasing the factor of safety as people are involved. Using
CIBSE building regulations, the recommended factor of safety for a ‘lifting equipment’ is 8-96. This is reinforced
using Health and Safety Executive regulations, where it states ‘where people are lifted, the factor of safety is
often higher’7

From the calculations above, it is obvious that both configurations surpasses the factor of safety of 8 by far, in
fact more than double. This is great in that the truss will be able to withstand its required force by at least 20
times. However, this will be a waste of resources and as mentioned in your proposal you wish to reduce
weight. To meet the required regulation as well as reduce weight the equation can be arranged.
𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 247
𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 = , 𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 = , 𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 30.875
𝑠𝑓 8

From the calculations above, we can see that the truss can take stresses of 30.875 MPa. Using the stress
equation using E as 210GPa. Strain will have a value of 1.74e-10. Using the formula for strain, using length of
600mm (Truss member G, configuration 2), and the change in length can be worked out as 8.82e-8mm. From
calculation these figures can be used as a minimum.

6
Engineeringtoolbox.com. (2017). Factors of Safety. [online] Available at: https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/factors-
safety-fos-d_1624.html [Accessed 8 Dec. 2017].
7
Hse.gov.uk. (2017). Planning and organising lifting operations - Work equipment and machinery. [online] Available at:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/work-equipment-machinery/planning-organising-lifting-operations.htm [Accessed 5 Dec.
2017].

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Recommendations
The suitable configuration for loading

Table 2a and 5b shows nodal displacement from MATLAB and Abaqus respectively. Comparing the two, the
results are almost identical, with a difference of 0.00001 maximum. This reinforces the accuracy of the results
and allows an informed decision to be made. The MATLAB results gave a result of 0 for a few values, but from
table 5b, abaqus gives us a more accurate result of 1.32e-35.

Table 2b and 6 shows the stress and strain of both configurations from MATLAB and Abaqus respectively.
These again are almost identical with a few anomalies.

Table 5 shows the difference in stress, strain and displacement. From this table it is obvious to see that
configuration 2 is better in terms of stress in comparison to configuration1. In fact configuration 2 is able to
withstand 17.67% more stress than configuration 1. This is a massive increase in maximum stress as it helps
create a higher factor of safety, which will help in the longevity of the product. As the truss is to be placed
overhead, the factor of safety plays a crucial role, as this provides further safety to the occupants of the
building below.

Configuration 2 is also good in terms of the maximum strain is it capable to withstand, being able to take
stresses more than a whopping 41.39% in comparison to configuration 1. This is due to the change in the
configuration of truss members. For the purpose of the truss and the material used means a high strain is good
as the truss can take deformation before it breaks, making it more ductile. This gives a safety feature as well as
a person can visibly see a deformation on the truss, and this can be repaired before any major damage is done.
Also another positive to having high strain is that the material can deform and return to its original shape.

Configuration 2 is better in terms of displacement, as having a high displacement is bad for the truss. Having a
high displacement is bad as the node moves more from its original position. This can lead to the material
having a fracture or breaking. The difference in displacement from configuration 1 to configuration 2 is -0.132,
which is very minimal.

Overall, configuration 2 is the best out of the two for loading, as it is able to withstand more stress, be more
flexible in terms of having high strain, and have less displacement.

The standard box section to safely withstand the applied load for suitable truss configuration

From the analysis provided earlier, it is apparent that the chosen cross sectional area of 1250mm2 for the truss
elements is far too high. This can be proven by the very high level of factor of safety. This shows that the truss
has been overdesigned. The required factor of safety for lifting equipment is 8, the chosen cross sectional area
on configuration 2 is 21. That is almost three times safer than is required. This shows that although the truss I
able to withstand the load of 10KN, it is not the best use of resources and cost to produce the cross sectional
area chosen. This is also counterproductive as in the proposal it was mentioned that a truss with less weight
and cross section is desirable.

Using a truss of 50mm by 25mm, with cross section area of 1250mm2 gave a factor of safety of 21. Using
simple maths to determine the cross section needed to give a factor of safety of 8, a cross section of
476.19mm2. The size of the truss to get the closest value is 22mm by 22mm which gives us a cross sectional
area of 484mm2. However as the standard box section has to be widely available in the UK, the truss size
mentioned above will not meet this criteria as it has to be custom made to that spec. The closest widely
available box section is 20mm by 25mm; using this configuration a factor of safety can be calculated as 8.4.
This allows the chosen truss configuration meet the regulations, reduced weight and a reduced cross sectional
area.

De Montfort University P15219444

 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics

References
Engineeringtoolbox.com. (2017). Poisson's ratio. [online] Available at:
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/poissons-ratio-d_1224.html [Accessed 8 Dec. 2017].

Schoolphysics.co.uk. (2017). schoolphysics ::Welcome::. [online] Available at:

http://www.schoolphysics.co.uk/age16-
19/Properties%20of%20matter/Elasticity/text/Elastic_moduli_and_Young_modulus/index.html
[Accessed 8 Dec. 2017].

Thyssenkruppaerospace.com. (2017). Weight calculations - Steel sheet & plate - thyssenkrupp Aerospace.
[online] Available at: http://www.thyssenkruppaerospace.com/materials/steel/steel-sheet-plate/weight-

Steelexpress.co.uk. (2017). Mild Steel Box Section - RHS - Rectangular Hollow Section. [online] Available at:
http://www.steelexpress.co.uk/structuralsteel/RHS.html [Accessed 8 Dec. 2017].

Benoi ̂t, J. and Lutenegger, A. (2000). National geotechnical experimentation sites. Reston, Va.: Geo Institute,
American Society of Civil Engineers.

Engineeringtoolbox.com. (2017). Factors of Safety. [online] Available at:

https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/factors-safety-fos-d_1624.html [Accessed 8 Dec. 2017].

Hse.gov.uk. (2017). Planning and organising lifting operations - Work equipment and machinery. [online]
Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/work-equipment-machinery/planning-organising-lifting-
operations.htm [Accessed 5 Dec. 2017].

Krauthammer T, Lim J, Oh GJ. Findings from three computer code validations with precision impact test data.
Proceedings of the 29th Department of Defense Explosive Safety Seminar, New Orleans, LA; 2000. p. 18–20.

De Montfort University P15219444