PROJECT – water tower Engineered solution and report

By Edwin Jins

APRIL 13, 2024

Ipswich grammar school
SEMESTER 1
Table of Contents…
Introduction…. Page 2

Success Criteria…. Page 2

Mechanics…. Page 3

Material Science…. Page 4

Technologies…. Page 5

Initial Sketches and Ideas…. Page 6

Refinements and Final Solution…. Page 7

Final Testing…. Page 8

Evaluation and Conclusion…. Page 9

References…. Page 10

1
Introduction
A water tower located in the outskirts of Western Queensland has fallen into disrepair with its structural
integrity now under question (Figure 1). In response, a new concept for a water tower is now required
in pursuit for a novel solution. A solution is crucial to necessitate a
reliable water supply, public health, and safety, maintain
infrastructure integrity, and sustain economic well-being within the
community. As a part of the designing process, concept drawing
and prototype models are to be created to help further visualise and
conceive improvements on the design. For the course of the
designing process the model water tower will apprehend a
17.5cm:1cm scale. This means the height of the model tower at a
minimum should be approximately 35cm and have a maximum
width of 20cm. In an ideal situation the model tower should hold
200kg without its structural integrity questioned. However, some
assumptions will have to be made within the design process,
including the assumption that the real-life tower will be capable of
withstanding weather conditions including wind (shear forces),
and rain without corrosion or losing integrity. Another assumption
that will have to be made, is that during the testing process no
excess force will be applied on the prototype tower, affecting the data.

Success Criteria
As a part of the design process, many qualitative and quantitative tests and observations are to be
completed in order to maximise efficiency and identify problems and issues within the design. Some
tests used to evaluate whether the tower will meet the objective of the prototype and real-life solution,
include the Autodesk static stress analysis test, balsa compression test and more.

The following items will form the success criteria for the tower:
For the prototype:

 It must hold a minimum of 20kg.

 Its dimensions must be 20cm wide and long (square) and 40cm high.
 It must be a truss style design.
 The joints must be connected by hot glue.
 The legs should be larger than the individual members.
 Have a performance index over 2000.
 Balsa used for the whole tower.
 Must follow a relative scale to the prototype tower (1cm:17.5cm)

For the real-life prototype:

 Must hold a minimum of 5000kg without losing structural integrity.

 Joints will be welded together.
 Made from steel (coated to prevent corrosion)
 Dimensions should be 3.5 metres wide and long (square) and 7 metres high.
 Must be a truss design.
 The legs should be larger than the individual member

2
 Mechanics
As evident through the
‘Balsa Compression Test’
(Figure 2) the longer the
Balsa less

compressive 170mm Balsa Compression Results 85mm Balsa Compression Results

Figure 3: Results of Balsa Compression Test
force it can
hold. An
170mm stick of Balsa can withstand around 160 newtons
of force whereas an 85mm stick of Balsa can handle 220
Figure 2: Balsa newtons of force (Figure 3). This is due to a phenomenon
Compression Test known as buckling, where the Balsa withholds a sudden
deformation, caused by the compressive force. As evident
through Figure 4 most of the compressive force
is located higher up the tower causing an
imbalance in force leading to the sudden
deformation. This led to the design of 2 mid
sections (Figure 5) which will help prevent
buckling and improve structural integrity. As
seen in Figure 6 Newtons 2nd Law ‘F=MA’
relates towards the problem as it helps
determine how much stress is placed onto Figure 4: Static Stress Analysis Test
certain areas of the tower. Newtons 3rd Law
is also applicable considering that for the
upwards force (gravity) there is an equal and
opposite reaction force.
Figure 5: Midsection While designing the tower, surface area was
Diagram taken into consideration as the greater the
surface area the less stress the tower withheld.
(Figure 7) Another consideration taken, was the number of vertical
members, as
the more
vertical
members the
less each
member was
required to
hold.

Figure 7: Stress Calculations

Figure 6: Free Body Diagram with force calculations

3
 Material Science
Within the construction process, discrepancies were found
within the Balsa with some pieces being denser than
others. This means that the denser Balsa would be capable
of withstanding greater force than the lighter balsa, but in
return would be heavier. Therefore, to replicate the real-life prototype where the beams, are larger in size
compared to the members – meaning they are stronger and heavier – the beams in the prototype model used
harder and denser balsa compared to the other members which were made with soft wood.

For the prototype, Balsa was specifically used due to its similarities in a scaled factor to steel. Both have a
similar strength to weight ratio as well as a similar compressive. This is evident through Figure 8. The
similarities of compressive strengths of balsa and steel can be underlined through test focusing on how much
force they can take before they lose integrity.

4
 Technologies
In structural engineering, a truss is an important structure
characterised by a triangulated system of members. These
members are structured and connected in a way such that they
only incur axial force. The members of a truss are considered
two-force members because the forces are only applied at either
end of the member, resulting in either a compression or tension
force. Trusses are commonly used in bridges, roofs etc. due to
their ability to efficiently span long distances. A truss system is a
suitable technology for the real-life and prototype water tower as
it helps support the legs incur mass. Truss systems are commonly
known for efficiently distributing loads along their members
through tension and compression. This distribution of forces
minimizes material usage while maximizing strength, making
truss systems ideal for supporting the weight of a water reservoir.

A key inspiration towards the design of the prototype water tower

includes Figure … As seen the water tower encapsulates the usage of both a Pratt truss and Howe truss. The
described water tower also relatively fits the descriptions in terms of dimensions and bearings in the real-life
scenario.

In truss systems, various joining and footing methods are utilized to connect the individual members and anchor
the structure to the ground. Some examples include welding, bolting, riveting and more. For the prototype hot
glue gun will be used to join the individual members due to its similarity to welding which is to be used for the
real-life model.

5
 Initial Sketches and Ideas
Within the designing process the concept of a hexagon- based water tower was considered due to its
success in the ‘straw tower test’ previously completed, as seen in Figure…

Group 2, which had designed the hexagonal based pyramid, successfully scored the highest performance index
leading to the inspiration of a similar design for the prototype tower as seen in Figure …

Figure …: sketch of initial

hexagonal design.

Another sketch idea emerged came,

inspiration from Figure…, a tower showcasing
similar dimensions and bearings to the tower

6
Figure .. : Square based
initial sketch
the task currently requires. This is displayed in Figure…

Refinements and Final Solution

After further research, the idea of a hexagonal based tower was scraped due to its complexity in
designing and imbalance in centre of line of action. This led to further development to the square
based design. When competed against the ‘Fusion Static Stress Analysis Test’, the tower showed to
hold up well to the load of 200kg, as seen in Figure… below.

7
This test showed the only real struggle the tower faced was
through the region underscored in Figure… This led to
the implementation of a Pennsylvanian truss through the top
regions of the tower to help with distribution of stress.
(Figure …).

Engineering drawings of the final solution

can be seen below. (Figure …)

8
9
10
Final Testing
For the testing procedure, a wooden slab, proportionate to the real-life
slab, was positioned atop the tower, and fastened to a chain that was
connected to a plate. The plate was tightened clockwise to increase
the amount of force applied onto the tower. (Figure..) This test will
help analyse how much compressive strength the prototype could
hold before losing integrity.

11
Evaluation and Conclusion
However, some struggles were countered along the way including
the set time frame. Due to time constraints some joints were rushed,
which was evident through the testing phase. Joints which were
rushed, due to increasing amounts of stress, failed to hold integrity
due to buckling (Figure…). Overall, the tower was a success
however further steps can be taken to make the tower more suitable to
what was required. The task required to make a tower which could
hold 20kg using the least number of materials possible. In that sense
tower 11 was over-engineered, meaning it was not feasible for the
real-life solution, although being on the lower average of material
usage. The number of materials however can be further reduced by

decreasing the number of midsections to one.

A prototype tower with this change can be
seen in Figure …. This tower is more fit for
the task and effectively hold 20kg while
reducing materials (Figure..)

Figure… : Engineering drawings of new

prototype tower

12
- work on conclusion, material science,
technology, annotation for tower, gussets in
technology, weight

13
14