DESIGNING, ENGINEERING, AND TESTING WOOD STRUCTURES
Thomas M. Gorman, Ph.D.
University of Idaho, Moscow, ID
KEY WORDS: wood, design, factor of safety, engineering economy, duration of load,
stress, tension, compression, bending, deflection
PREREOUISITE KNOWLEDGE: This material could be taught to a typical student of
materials science, at the high school level or above.
OBJECTIVES: To introduce basic structural engineering concepts in a clear, simple manner
while actively involving students. This project emphasizes the fact that a good design uses
materials efficiently.
The test structure (Figure 1) *can be easily assembled, has various design options, and can
be reused year after year. Even when the structure is loaded until it collapses, only one or
two pieces usually break, leaving the remaining pieces intact and reusable.
Groups of students are asked to use their intuition to choose different pieces with various
cross-sectional areas for the structure, which will span a distance of 0.9 m (3 ft). Their goal
is to support at least 23 kg (50 lb) at a minimum cost.
EOUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES: This list includes materials for three demonstration
models plus enough material for three student groups to complete any design that they
choose.
Superstructure
About 5.5 m (18 ft) of Southern Pine or Douglas-fir nominal 2 x 4 (38 x 89 mm). If another
type of wood is used, you may have to adjust the target load value. The ideal structure
should comfortably support the target load. Cut wood to sizes and drill the holes as
indicated in Figure 2.
Make pieces as clear (free of knots) and straight grained (grain parallel to length of piece)
as possible.
32 red pieces
32 blue pieces
32 green pieces
60 yellow pieces
Frame, supports and platform
Nine 19 mm x 51 mm x 305 mm (3/4 in x 2 in x 12 in) pieces of wood with slots as
shown in Figure 5a
Six 6.4 mm x 25.4 mm x 254 mm (1/4 in x 1 in x 10 in) pieces of wood
Two 216 mm (8-112 in) pieces of nominal 2 x 4s (38 mm x 89 mm) with a 3.2 mm (1/8
in) lengthwise groove.
One 457 mm x 305 mm x 19 mm (18 in x 12 in x 3/4 in) piece of plywood with holes
drilled in each corner
* Figures 1--8 are grouped according to experimental sequence.
Hardware
3.2 mm (1/8 in) diameter threaded rod--total of 9 m (30 ft) cut to 305 mm (12 in) lengths
60 wing nuts
120 hex nuts
120 washers
Three nails, approximately 4 mm in diameter (l0-penny)
Approximately 6 m (20 ft) of 1.0 mm diameter (l8-gauge) copper or bronze wire
Other
Spray paint or marking pens (four colors for marking wood)
Nylon cord (4.6 m to :5.5 m (l5-18 ft) length, 3.1 mm (1/8 in) diameter)
Carpet or pad to protect floor
Weights (bricks or suitable dense objects of equal, known weight)
Safety glasses for each student
PROCEDURE: The structures to be built have interchangeable pieces of varying size and
cost. There are four types of pieces of equal length with varying cross-sectional
dimensions, referred to in units. Each unit equals 1.6 mm (1/16 in). Thus, a 1/4 in x 1 in
piece is 4 x 16 units. Fictitious dollar values are assigned to each piece based on the amount
of wood used and are color coded for easy identification (Figure 3).
Before the actual classroom activity, prepare three models for demonstration, using the
model in Figure 4. Make sure to place a washer between each wooden piece and the hex
and wing nuts on the rods. Once the structure is assembled, attach wire supports diagonally
to the wing nuts at each end of the rods as shown in Figure 4. These supports prevent the
structure from collapsing sideways.
The loading frame is necessary to prevent lateral buckling, or twisting, of the top pieces.
The frame is designed to rest on the top pieces of wood that have been spaced 229 mm (9
in) apart by the hex nuts on the threaded rods. Make sure that this measurement is accurate.
Three frames are needed with slots of different widths to match the three possible widths of
the top cross pieces (see Figures 5a and 5b). The loading heads are made from nine 19 mm
x 51 mm x 305 mm (3/4 in x 2 in x 12 in) wood pieces with 1 inch slots cut as shown in
Figure 5a. The braces are made from six 6.4 mm x 25.4 x 254 mm (114 in x 1 in x 10 in)
wood pieces. Three nails--approximately 4 mm in diameter (l0-penny)--serve as loading
frame pins.
The "super economy" model is made with all yellow pieces (the weakest ones, 2 x 6 units)
for a total cost of $14. The second model is made with all red pieces (the strongest ones, 4 x
16 units); it looks very sturdy, but its cost is a formidable $116. The third model
(combination of blue, green, and yellow) costs $32 and is the most efficient design. This
"ideal" model is kept out of view until all the students' structures are tested. It would be a
good idea to pretest your ideal model to make sure that it supports the 23 kg (50 lb) load. If
it doesn't, you could adjust the target-load value.
Explain the challenge--to design and build an efficient structure capable of supporting 23
kg (50 lb) at a minimum cost. As an example, bring out the red structure (the strongest) and
load it to 46 kg (100 lb). No visible signs of stress on the structure will be evident. The
students are told that the structures could be built without red pieces and still support 23 kg
(50 lb), but they can use the red pieces if they'd like. You might want to put an upper limit
on the total dollar cost for each structure to prevent students from being overly conservative
in their design.
The class is divided into groups, and each group receives a supply of lumber and materials.
Students are encouraged to use their intuition and discuss their design within their group
before proceeding to build it. They should take about 15 minutes to complete their design.
After everyone has assembled their structures, begin testing (Figure 6). By adding loads in
small, 4.5 kg (10 lb) increments, students can see problems developing before catastrophic
failure.
Add weights one at a time; be prepared for a sudden collapse of the structure. Green pieces
(5 x 6 units), when used as top members, will break well below the target load. Blue pieces
(2 x 16 units), as side compression members, should break or show considerable buckling
at the target load. Wear safety glasses. Make sure that the students also wear safety glasses
and stay several feet away from the structure. Continue adding weight until the structure
collapses or the optimal weight is reached. It will become obvious to the students that the
way a piece performs depends on where the piece is placed in the structure. Students will
mentally revise their designs as they watch their structures contort and buckle under the
heavy load.
In some cases, the bowed structures actually hold the 23 kg (50 lb) load, but students will
realize that they wouldn't want to be driving across a structure of that design! This
illustrates the concept that maximum allowable deflection is sometimes the limiting factor
in engineering design.
Sometimes the structure will hold the load initially, but suddenly will come crashing down
before the next weight is added. This unexpected phenomenon shows that the length of
time a structure is loaded affects how it behaves. This illustrates the concept of duration of
load.
After each group's structure is tested, load the "super economy" yellow structure (2 x 6 unit
pieces) which, when tested, doesn't support even a 4.5 kg (10 lb) load. Next, unveil the socalled "ideal" design and show that it will indeed support the 23 kg (50 lb) load, without
showing too many signs of impending failure. As a grand finale, load the red structure (the
strongest). You can keep adding weight until the structure shows signs of stress, or for a
dramatic effect, continue adding weight until it crashes to the floor as the load exceeds 69
kg (150 lb).
On the blackboard, record the cost of each structure and the load it held before it collapsed.
These test results give you the opportunity to compare the safety, cost, and design
efficiency of each structure. The structures that support a higher load are the safest, while
the ones that support at least 23 kg (50 lb) for the lowest cost are the most efficient.
Occasionally, variability in wood performance shows up when similar designs perform
differently.
Another concept that may be discussed during this demonstration is the factor of safety.
You may explain that the factor of safety chosen for a given situation depends on many
variables, including the duration and frequency of the applied load, the variability in
performance of the structure, and the consequences of a failure (would it be life
threatening?).
Both the size (cross-sectional area) and shape of a piece of wood affects its performance
when it is subjected to stress. By designing wisely, you can use less wood and still have a
strong, reliable structure.
INSTRUCTOR NOTES: As a way to begin analyzing what happens to the structures, have
the students pick up individual pieces and try to bend, compress, and pull them in tension
with their hands. Because of their different dimensions, each piece responds differently to
the forces. By comparing what happens to the individual pieces with the performance of the
structures, the students can begin to identify forces causing the structures to deform. All
pieces for this experiment are made from clear wood (free of knots or other defects) and are
very strong in tension. A small cross-sectional area can withstand very high loads. Try to
pull apart a yellow piece (2 x 6 units) by pulling the ends away from one another. Next, try
pushing in on the ends of the same yellow piece. When a piece is loaded in compression, it
tends to buckle. The load at which it begins to buckle is controlled by the narrowest crosssectional dimension. Compare the effects of compression on the blue (2 x 16 units) and
green (5 x 6 units) pieces, which have nearly identical cross-sectional areas. The blue piece
buckles more easily than the green piece because it has the narrowest critical dimension. In
compression, then, a square cross-sectional area makes the most efficient use of material.
Now compare bending the blue piece (2 x 16 units) in the two ways shown in Figure 7. The
most important dimension of bending is depth. The deeper the piece, the stiffer it is and
harder it is to bend. This is because stiffness is directly proportional to the cube of the depth
and only linearly proportional to the width.
When a student-built structure is supporting a load, the forces distributed to each piece
depend on its location within the structure (Figure 8). As discussed at the beginning of the
demonstration, red pieces are more than adequate (but not necessary) to support the
maximum predetermined load. A discussion of engineering principles applied to wood
design provides the clues students need to choose pieces adequate for building a structure
that meets its design criteria with a minimum amount of wood (or cost).
FOR FURTHER READING: Hoadley, R. B. 1980. Understanding Wood. The Taunton Press,
Newtown, CT.
McCarthy, M., and T. Gorman. 1990. Building excitement in the classroom. The Science Teacher
57(5):43-49.
USDA Forest Service. 1987. Wood Handbook. USDA Agri. Handbk. 72 (rev.) Madison, WI.
SOURCES OF SUPPLIES: All materials for this demonstration are commonly available in
home centers, hardware stores, and/or building supply outlets.
Figure 6. Testing the structure. In the first photo, one group's structure is loaded as the rest
of the class looks on. (Note that everyone is wearing safety glasses) Next, side sections
begin to buckle just before structural collapse. The structure supported 32 kg (70 lb) before
it gave way. (Photos courtesy of USDA Forest Products Laboratory)
