School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering

Faculty of Engineering

UNSW Sydney

AERO3110 Design Problem 1 – Space Truss

Structure

Naomi Subin Youm

Student ID: z5162671
Table of Contents
1. Margin of Safety Summary ................................................................................................ 1
2. Design Problem .................................................................................................................. 2
3. Calculations of Internal Loads and Margins of Safety for each member ........................... 3
3.1. Truss Dimensions and Load Values ............................................................................ 3
3.2. Calculation of Internal Loads for members AB, AC, and AD .................................... 3
3.3. Calculation of Margins of Safety ................................................................................ 6
3.3.1. Tension Limit ........................................................................................................... 9
3.3.2. Compression Limit ................................................................................................... 9
3.3.3. Ultimate Tension ...................................................................................................... 9
3.3.4. Column Failure (Ultimate Compression) ................................................................. 9
3.3.5. Local Buckling (Ultimate Compression) ................................................................ 10
3.3.6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 11
4. Recommended Steel Profile for Members AC and AD ................................................... 12
4.1. Selection of Steel Profile ........................................................................................... 12
4.2. Calculation of Margins of Safety with Selected Profile ............................................ 13
4.2.1. Tension Limit ......................................................................................................... 14
4.2.2. Compression Limit ................................................................................................. 14
4.2.3. Column Failure (Ultimate Compression) ............................................................... 14
4.2.4. Local Buckling (Ultimate Compression) ................................................................ 14
4.2.5. Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 14
5. Recommended Titanium Profile ....................................................................................... 15
5.1. Selection of Titanium Profile .................................................................................... 15
5.2. Calculation of Margins of Safety with Selected Profile ............................................ 16
5.2.1. Tension Limit ......................................................................................................... 16
5.2.2. Compression Limit ................................................................................................. 16
5.2.3. Column Failure (Ultimate Compression) ............................................................... 17
5.2.4. Local Buckling (Ultimate Compression) ................................................................ 17
5.2.5. Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 17
6. Overall Material and Section Recommendation ............................................................... 18
References ................................................................................................................................ 19
 1. Margin of Safety Summary
A truss structure made from Steel AISI 301 (AMS 5902) members is proposed as a design for
an asteroid and meteoroid detector. By analysing the truss structure and implementing load
cases, the margins of safety for each member for the given material, geometry, and load can
be calculated to determine if the design is acceptable in real life applications. The margins of
safety are calculated for each member, depending on whether they are in tension or
compression, the following margins of safety are considered:

• Limit tension
• Limit compression
• Ultimate tension
• Column failure (ultimate compression)
• Local buckling (ultimate compression)

These margins of safety are crucial in determining whether a certain member in the truss
must be redesigned. If the margins of safety fail in any conditions as listed above, that
member must be redesigned to ensure the margin of safety is at least greater than zero.
 2. Design Problem
A truss structure is proposed to support an asteroid and meteoroid detector. By treating all
elements as ideal truss elements, the structure is analysed to determine all internal loads and
Margins of Safety for members AB, AC, and AD. Truss profiles are designed to support the
provided load case below, using steel and titanium.

Figure 1: Truss structure for asteroid and meteoroid detector

 3. Calculations of Internal Loads and Margins of Safety for
each member
3.1. Truss Dimensions and Load Values

A 6
B 2
C 6
D 7
E 1
Table 1: Values for load cases and lengths

The truss dimensions and load factors are calculated as presented below:

𝐿1 = 12 + 𝐵 = 12 + 2 = 14"
𝐿2 = 12 + 𝐶 = 12 + 6 = 18"
𝐴 6
𝐿3 = 10 + = 10 + = 13"
2 2
𝐷 7
𝐿4 = 3 + = 3 + = 4.75"
4 4
𝑃 = 140 + 2𝐸 = 140 + 2(1) = 142𝑙𝑏𝐹
𝐿3 13 923
𝑅 = ( ) 𝑃 = ( ) (142) = 𝑙𝑏𝐹
𝐿1 14 3
𝐿2 18 1278
𝑆 = ( ) 𝑃 = ( ) (142) = 𝑙𝑏𝐹
𝐿1 14 7

L1 14”
L2 18”
L3 13”
L4 4.75”
P 142 lbF
R 923
= 131.857…lbF
7
S 1278
= 182.571…lbF
7
Table 2: Truss dimensions and load values

3.2. Calculation of Internal Loads for members AB, AC, and AD

 Figure 2: Free body diagram of joint A for truss structure
Assumptions:
• P is parallel to the z-axis
• R is parallel to the y-axis
• S is parallel to the x-axis
• All joints are pin joints, all members (AB, AC, and AD) are truss joints

Note that AD includes components of x, y, z directions.

Figure 3: Triangle ABC

13
𝛼 = ∠𝐵𝐴𝐶 = tan−1 ( ) = 42.8789 … °
14
𝐴𝐶 = √𝐴𝐵 + 𝐵𝐶 = √142 + 132 = 19.1049 … "
2 2

Let E be a point on the x-axis which makes a right-angled triangle BED.

 Figure 4: Triangle BED

𝐵𝐷 = √𝐵𝐶 2 + 𝐵𝐸 2 = √4.752 + 182 = 18.6162 … "

Figure 5: Triangle ABD

𝐴𝐷 = √𝐴𝐵 2 + 𝐵𝐷2 = √142 + 18.6162 …2 = 23.2929 … "

𝐿𝐴𝐷 𝑋 = 18"
𝐿𝐴𝐷𝑌 = 4.75"
𝐿𝐴𝐷𝑍 = 14"

𝐿𝐴𝐷 𝑋 18
= = 0.7727 …
𝐿𝐴𝐷 23.2929 …
𝐿𝐴𝐷 𝑌 4.75
= = 0.2039 …
𝐿𝐴𝐷 23.2929 …
𝐿𝐴𝐷 𝑍 14
= = 0.6010 …
𝐿𝐴𝐷 23.2929 …
Considering the X direction:

↘ + ∑ 𝐹𝑋 = 0

1278 1278
0=− + 𝐹𝐴𝐷 𝑋 = − + 𝐹𝐴𝐷 (0.7727 … )
7 7
1278
𝐹𝐴𝐷 (0.7727 … ) =
7
𝐹𝐴𝐷 = 236.2572 … = 236.3𝑙𝑏𝐹 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓)[𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛]

Considering the Y direction:

↗ + ∑ 𝐹𝑌 = 0

923 923
0= + 𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑌 + 𝐹𝐴𝐷 𝑌 = + 𝐹𝐴𝐶 sin(𝛼) + 𝐹𝐴𝐷 (0.2039 … )
7 7
923
− 7 − 236.2572 … × (0.2039 … )
𝐹𝐴𝐶 =
sin(42.8789 … )
= −264.5828 … = −264.6𝑙𝑏𝐹 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓)[𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛]

Considering the Z direction:

↑ + ∑ 𝐹𝑍 = 0
0 = 142 + 𝐹𝐴𝐵 + 𝐹𝐴𝐷𝑍 + 𝐹𝐴𝐶𝑍 = 142 + 𝐹𝐴𝐵 + 236.25(0.6010 … ) − 264.5828 cos(𝛼)
𝐹𝐴𝐵 = −142 − 236.25 … × (0.6010 … ) − −264.5828 cos(42.8789 … ) = −90.1153 …
= −90.12𝑙𝑏𝐹 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓)[𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛]

3.3. Calculation of Margins of Safety

Given that the external diameter is 0.375” and wall thickness 0.028”, the cross-sectional area
of the steel tubing is calculated by:

𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 = 𝑑𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑟 − 2 × 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑘𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 0.375 − 2 × 0.028 = 0.319"

𝜋 2 2
𝜋
𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 = 𝐴 = (𝑑𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑟 − 𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 ) = (0.3752 − 0.3192 ) = 0.03052 … 𝑖𝑛2
4 4

Now, the moment of inertia of the steel tubing can be found by:

𝜋 𝑑𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑟 4 𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 4 𝜋 0.375 4 0.319 4

𝐼= (( ) −( ) ) = (( ) −( ) ) = 0.0004624 … 𝑖𝑛4
4 2 2 4 2 2

External Diameter (D) 0.375”

 Wall Thickness (t) 0.028”
Limit Load Factor 3
Ultimate Load Factor 1.4
𝐹𝐴𝐷 236.3𝑙𝑏𝐹
𝐹𝐴𝐶 −264.6𝑙𝑏𝐹
𝐹𝐴𝐵 −90.12𝑙𝑏𝐹
Area 0.03052…in2
Moment of inertia (I) 0.0004624…in4
LAC 19.1049…”
LAB 14”
Table 3: Values required to calculate margins of safety

It is given that the material for the truss is Steel AISI AMS 5902. Below is a table from
MMPDS-15 with the properties of the selected material.
 Figure 6: Table 2.7.1.0(b1) from MMPDS-15 [2]

For steel tubing with wall thickness of 0.028”, the relevant data selected from table
2.7.1.0(b1) from MMPDS-15 is listed below:

• 𝐹𝑇𝑈 = 157 000 𝑝𝑠𝑖

• 𝐹𝑇𝑌 = 118 000 𝑝𝑠𝑖
• 𝐹𝐶𝑌 = 75 000 𝑝𝑠𝑖
• 𝐸𝐶 = 26.0 × 106 𝑝𝑠𝑖

𝐹𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 = 𝐹𝐴𝐷 × 𝐿𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 = 236.3 × 3 = 708.9𝑙𝑏𝐹 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛]

𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 = 𝐹𝐴𝐶 × 𝐿𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 = −264.6 × 3 = −793.8𝑙𝑏𝐹 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛]
𝐹𝐴𝐵 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 = 𝐹𝐴𝐵 × 𝐿𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 = −90.12 × 3 = −270.36𝑙𝑏𝐹 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛]
 𝐹𝐴𝐷 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 = 𝐹𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 × 𝑈𝑙𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 = 708.9 × 1.4
= 992.46𝑙𝑏𝐹 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛]
𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 = 𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 × 𝑈𝑙𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 = −793.8 × 1.4
= −1111.32𝑙𝑏𝐹 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛]
𝐹𝐴𝐵 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 = 𝐹𝐴𝐵 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 × 𝑈𝑙𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 = −270.36 × 1.4
= −378.504𝑙𝑏𝐹 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛]

3.3.1. Tension Limit

𝐹𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 708.9

𝜎𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = = = 23 224.565 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐴 0.03052 …
𝐹𝑇𝑌 118 000
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = −1= − 1 = 4.08082 …
𝜎𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 23 224.565 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = 4.081 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

3.3.2. Compression Limit

𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 793.8

𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = = = 26 006.009 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐴 0.03052 …
𝐹𝐶𝑌 75 000
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = −1= − 1 = 1.88394 …
𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 26 006.009 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = 1.884 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

𝐹𝐴𝐵 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 270.36

𝜎𝐴𝐵 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = = = 8857.3755 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐴 0.03052 …
𝐹𝐶𝑌 75 000
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐵 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = −1= − 1 = 7.467519 …
𝜎𝐴𝐵 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 8857.3755 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐵 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = 7.468 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

3.3.3. Ultimate Tension

𝐹𝐴𝐷 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 992.46

𝜎𝐴𝐷 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = = = 32 514.29 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐴 0.03052 …
𝐹𝑇𝑈 157 000
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐷 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = −1= −1
𝜎𝐴𝐷 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 32 514.29 …
= 3.82863 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐷 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = 3.829 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

3.3.4. Column Failure (Ultimate Compression)

For Member AC:

𝜋 2 𝐸𝑐 𝐼 𝜋 2 × 26.0 × 106 × 0.0004624 …
𝑃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 = 2 = = 325.0911 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐿𝐴𝐶 19.1049 …2
 𝑃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 325.0911 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = −1= − 1 = −0.707472 …
𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 1111.32
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = −0.7075 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐹𝐴𝐼𝐿

For Member AB:

𝜋 2 𝐸𝑐 𝐼 𝜋 2 × 26.0 × 106 × 0.0004624 …
𝑃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 = 2 = = 605.3999 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐿𝐴𝐵 142
𝑃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 605.3999 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐵 𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = −1= − 1 = 0.599452 …
𝐹𝐴𝐵 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 378.504
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐵 𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = 0.5995 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

3.3.5. Local Buckling (Ultimate Compression)

𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 1111.32

𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = = = 36 408.4132 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐴 0.03052 …
𝐹𝐴𝐵 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 378.504
𝜎𝐴𝐵 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = = = 12 400.3257 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐴 0.03052 …

𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = 36 408.4132 … < 𝐹𝐶𝑌 = 75 000 𝑝𝑠𝑖, so 𝐸𝑇 = 𝐸𝐶 for AC.
𝜎𝐴𝐵 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = 12 400.3257 … < 𝐹𝐶𝑌 = 75 000 𝑝𝑠𝑖, so 𝐸𝑇 = 𝐸𝐶 for AB.

For a round tube

0.5√𝐸𝑇 𝐸𝐶
𝐹𝐶𝐶 =
𝐷
𝑡

When in elastic range of material, 𝐸𝐶 = 𝐸𝑡 , so the equation above becomes

0.5√𝐸𝐶2 0.5𝐸𝐶 0.5 × 26.0 × 106

𝐹𝐶𝐶 = = = = 970 666.666 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐷 𝐷 0.375
𝑡 𝑡 0.028

For Member AC:

𝐹𝐶𝐶 970 666.666 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝑂𝐶𝐴𝐿 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = −1= − 1 = 25.66050 …
𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 36 408.4132 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝑂𝐶𝐴𝐿 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = 25.66 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

For Member AB:

0.5 × 26.0 × 106
𝐹𝐶𝐶 𝐴𝐵 = = 970 666.666 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
0.375
0.028
𝐹𝐶𝐶 970 666.666 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐵 𝐿𝑂𝐶𝐴𝐿 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = −1= −1
𝜎𝐴𝐵 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 12 400.3257 …
= 77.277513 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐵 𝐿𝑂𝐶𝐴𝐿 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = 77.28 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸
3.3.6 Conclusion

The margins of safety found are summarised in a table below.

𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 4.081

𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 1.884
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐵 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 7.468
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐷 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 3.829
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 -0.7075 FAIL
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐵 𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 0.5995
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝑂𝐶𝐴𝐿 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 25.66
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐵 𝐿𝑂𝐶𝐴𝐿 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 77.28
Table 4: Margins of safety for members AD, AC, AB

In conclusion, the member AC will fail in column buckling for the given load case, material,
and geometry. Hence the member must be redesigned to meet the given load case.
 4. Recommended Steel Profile for Members AC and AD
4.1. Selection of Steel Profile
From Table 4 from 3.3.6., we consider 𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] as the main reference for
minimum area as it has the lowest margin of safety. 𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 has a negative
margin of safety, hence it must be redesigned based on the moment of inertia.
Consider compression limit as the most critical margin of safety based on area.
For 𝑀𝑆 > 0,
𝐹𝐶𝑌
−1>0
𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛]
𝐹𝐶𝑌 > 𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛]
𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇
=
𝐴
𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 793.8
𝐴> = = 0.010584𝑖𝑛2
𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 75 000

Consider column buckling as the most critical margin of safety based on inertia.
For 𝑀𝑆 > 0,
𝑃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡
−1>0
𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇
𝑃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 > 𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇
𝜋 2 𝐸𝑐 𝐼
> 𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇
𝐿2𝐴𝐶
𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 𝐿2𝐴𝐶 1111.32 × 19.1049 …2
𝐼> = = 0.001580734 … 𝑖𝑛4
𝜋 2 𝐸𝑐 𝜋 2 × 26.0 × 106

To pass all Margins of Safety with AISI 301 AMS 5902:

𝐴 > 0.010584𝑖𝑛2
𝐼 > 0.001580734 … 𝑖𝑛4

From Bruhn’s table C4.3 below, 2 suitable profiles are available with the 2 conditions above.
 Figure 7: Bruhn’s Table, properties of round tubing [1]

Option 1 Option 2
D = 0.5” D = 5/8” = 0.625”
t = 0.040” t = 0.028”
A = 0.06943in2 A = 0.05252in2
I = 0.001786in4 I = 0.002345in4
Table 5: Two options for steel member profile selection

The area of Option 1 is greater than the area of Option 2, hence it will be heavier. Since the
requirement is minimal weight, Option 2 is selected as the recommended profile.

4.2. Calculation of Margins of Safety with Selected Profile

4.2.1. Tension Limit

𝐹𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 708.9

𝜎𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = = = 13 497.715 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐴 0.05252
𝐹𝑇𝑌 118 000
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = −1= − 1 = 7.742220 …
𝜎𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 13 497.715 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = 7.742 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

4.2.2. Compression Limit

𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 793.8

𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = = = 15 114.242 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐴 0.05052
𝐹𝐶𝑌 75 000
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = −1= − 1 = 3.962207 …
𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 15 114.242 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = 3.962 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

4.2.3. Column Failure (Ultimate Compression)

𝜋 2 𝐸𝑐 𝐼 𝜋 2 × 26.0 × 106 × 0.002345

𝑃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 = = = 1 648.629 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐿2𝐴𝐶 19.1049 …2
𝑃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 1 648.629 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = −1 = − 1 = 0.48348 …
𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 1111.32
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = 0.4835 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓)𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

4.2.4. Local Buckling (Ultimate Compression)

0.5𝐸𝐶 0.5 × 26.0 × 106

𝐹𝐶𝐶 = = = 582 4000 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐷 0.625
𝑡 0.028
𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 1111.32
𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = = = 21 159.9390 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐴 0.05252
𝐹𝐶𝐶 582 400
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝑂𝐶𝐴𝐿 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = −1= −1
𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 21 159.9390 …
= 26.523708 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝑂𝐶𝐴𝐿 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = 26.52 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

4.2.5. Conclusion

Hence with a selected profile of D = 0.625”, t = 0.028”, A = 0.05252in2, and I = 0.002345in4

in AISI 201 AMS 5902 in steel tubing, all members AC and AD can withstand the axial
loads.
 5. Recommended Titanium Profile

5.1. Selection of Titanium Profile

Below is a table from MMPDS-15 with the properties of the selected material Ti-6Al-4V
titanium (AMS 4934).

Figure 8: Table 5.4.1.0(e) from MMPDS-15[2]

For wall thickness less than 0.5”, the relevant data selected table 5.4.1.0(e) from MMPDS-15
is listed below:

• 𝐹𝑇𝑈 = 155 000 𝑝𝑠𝑖

• 𝐹𝑇𝑌 = 138 000 𝑝𝑠𝑖
• 𝐹𝐶𝑌 = 147 000 𝑝𝑠𝑖
• 𝐸𝐶 = 17.2 × 106 𝑝𝑠𝑖

Consider compression limit as the most critical margin of safety based on area.
For 𝑀𝑆 > 0,
𝐹𝐶𝑌
−1>0
𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛]
𝐹𝐶𝑌 > 𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛]
 𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇
=
𝐴
𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 793.8
𝐴> = = 0.0054𝑖𝑛2
𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 147 000

Consider column buckling as the most critical margin of safety based on inertia.
For 𝑀𝑆 > 0,
𝑃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡
−1>0
𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇
𝑃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 > 𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇
𝜋 2 𝐸𝑐 𝐼
> 𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇
𝐿2𝐴𝐶
𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 𝐿2𝐴𝐶 1111.32 × 19.1049 …2
𝐼> 2
= 2 6
= 0.00238948 … 𝑖𝑛4
𝜋 𝐸𝑐 𝜋 × 17.2 × 10

To pass all Margins of Safety with Ti-6Al-4V titanium (AMS 4934):

𝐴 > 0.0054𝑖𝑛2
𝐼 > 0.00238948 … 𝑖𝑛4

From Bruhn’s table C4.3 in Figure 7, the following profile is the most suitable with the 2
conditions above, taking into consideration of minimum weight as a requirement:
• D = 5/8” = 0.625”
• t = 0.035”
• A = 0.06487in2
• I = 0.002833in4

5.2. Calculation of Margins of Safety with Selected Profile

5.2.1. Tension Limit

𝐹𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 708.9

𝜎𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = = = 10 928.00987 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐴 0.06487
𝐹𝑇𝑌 138 000
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = −1= − 1 = 11.628099 …
𝜎𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 10 928.00987 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐷 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = 11.63 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

5.2.2. Compression Limit

𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 793.8

𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = = = 12 236.78125 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐴 0.06487
 𝐹𝐶𝑌 147 000
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = −1= −1
𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 12 236.78125 …
= 11.01296 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = 11.01 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

5.2.3. Column Failure (Ultimate Compression)

𝜋 2 𝐸𝑐 𝐼 𝜋 2 × 17.2 × 106 × 0.002833

𝑃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 = 2 = = 1 317.5948 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐿𝐴𝐶 19.1049 …2
𝑃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 1 648.629 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = −1= − 1 = 0.185612 …
𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 1111.32
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐶𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝑁 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = 0.1856 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓)𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

5.2.4. Local Buckling (Ultimate Compression)

0.5𝐸𝐶 0.5 × 17.2 × 106

𝐹𝐶𝐶 = = = 481 600 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐷 0.625
𝑡 0.035
𝐹𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 𝐿𝐼𝑀𝐼𝑇 1111.32
𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] = = = 17 131.49376 … 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐴 0.06487
𝐹𝐶𝐶 481 600
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝑂𝐶𝐴𝐿 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = −1= − 1 = 27.1119 …
𝜎𝐴𝐶 𝑈𝐿𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸 [𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛] 17 131.49376 …
𝑀𝑆𝐴𝐶 𝐿𝑂𝐶𝐴𝐿 𝐵𝑈𝐶𝐾𝐿𝐼𝑁𝐺 = 27.11 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) 𝐴𝑀𝑃𝐿𝐸

5.2.5. Conclusion

Hence with a selected profile of D = 0.625”, t = 0.035”, A = 0.06487in2, and I = 0.002833in4

in Ti-6Al-4V titanium (AMS 4934) tubing, all members AC and AD can withstand the axial
loads.
 6. Overall Material and Section Recommendation
For Steel AISI 301 AMS 5902:
𝑙𝑏
𝜔 = 0.286
𝑖𝑛3
𝑊 = 𝐴𝐿𝜔
𝑊 𝑙𝑏𝐹
= 𝐴𝜔 = 0.05252 × 0.286 = 0.01502072 …
𝐿 𝑖𝑛

For Ti-6Al-4V titanium (AMS 4934):

𝑙𝑏
𝜔 = 0.160
𝑖𝑛3
𝑊 = 𝐴𝐿𝜔
𝑊 𝑙𝑏𝐹
= 𝐴𝜔 = 0.06487 × 0.160 = 0.0103792 …
𝐿 𝑖𝑛

AB AD AC
Steel 𝑊 𝑊 𝑊
𝑊𝐴𝐵 = × 𝐿𝐴𝐵 𝑊𝐴𝐷 = × 𝐿𝐴𝐷 𝑊𝐴𝐶 = × 𝐿𝐴𝐶
𝐿 𝐿 𝐿
= 0.01502 … × 14 = 0.01502 … × 23.29 … = 0.01502 … × 19.10 …
= 0.210290 … = 0.349877 … = 0.286970 …
= 0.2103𝑙𝑏𝐹 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) = 0.3499𝑙𝑏𝐹 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) = 0.2870𝑙𝑏𝐹 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓)
Titanium 𝑊 𝑊 𝑊
𝑊𝐴𝐵 = × 𝐿𝐴𝐵 𝑊𝐴𝐷 = × 𝐿𝐴𝐷 𝑊𝐴𝐶 = × 𝐿𝐴𝐶
𝐿 𝐿 𝐿
= 0.010379 … × 14 = 0.01037 … × 23.29 … = 0.01037 … × 19.10 …
= 0.1453088 … = 0.241762 … = 0.198294 …
= 0.1453𝑙𝑏𝐹 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) = 0.2418𝑙𝑏𝐹 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓) = 0.1983𝑙𝑏𝐹 (4. 𝑠. 𝑓)
Table 6: Weight comparison for the two materials in each member

For all members, the weight smaller in Ti-6Al-4V titanium (AMS 4934) in comparison to
Steel AISI 301 AMS 5902. With a selected profile of D = 0.625”, t = 0.035”, A = 0.06487in2,
and I = 0.002833in4 in Ti-6Al-4V titanium (AMS 4934) tubing, all members AC and AD can
withstand the axial loads, hence being the recommended material and section that will meet
the strength requirements at the lowest weight.
References
[1] Bruhn, E. (1973). Analysis and design of flight vehicle structures. Indianapolis: SR Jacobs
& Associates.
[2] Institute, B. M. (2020). MMPDS-15.