Talk:Truss bridge

message: I'm not sure I agree with this recently added comment. In Europe and I understand elsewhere, the cost of steel has increased enormously in recent years, but in most places the cost of labour is considerably larger, which is one reason we weld girders in automated machines rather than employ people to rivet them. Can I suggest that the wording be amended to note that the "relative" price of materials and labour will affect design decisions, and remove the reference to "decreasing"? --Kvetner 11:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Price of steel vs labour 

message: Various reversions didn't always get all the way back and it looks like we've lost some content. will investigate shortly if someone doesn't beat me to it. ++Lar: t/c 18:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorted, i think. Normally I'd just revert but it was so bad I figured I better give a heads up in case there was substantive intermediate change lost. ++Lar: t/c 19:31, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History in the US seems missing 

message: "In the bridges illustrated above the vertical members are in tension, lower horizontal members in tension, shear, and bending, diagonal and top members are in compression." This sentence doesn't seem to reference any illustrations on the page, I'm assuming it has been copied from elsewhere, or the illustrations subsequently removed. Does anyone have any good diagrams illustrating the forces on truss members? RoscoHead 00:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well spotted. That text looks changed by LeonardG and others to now refer to the image in the infobox. Perhaps what happened is that the image previously was at the top of the article, but when the infobox was added, the text wasn't changed to refer to where the image was? I am not sure, you'd have to check the history. I'm not a bridge expert by any means (my Brown truss article had the tension and compression all wrong, sadly) but I agree that force diagrams for various truss types would be nice. The West Point bridge simulation program (which I used to make the Brown truss illustration and which you can get free from the US Army here:  ) will show forces but it has the flaw of only allowing pinned connections, you can't have a long member with a connection in the middle, as it doesn't seem to simulate bending moments. I tried drawing something in Inkscape by hand, but it would have been a very long and slow process so I gave up. It would be nice if someone created these for the common truss types (I have been toying with the idea of writing articles for Pratt, Howe, Warren, Bowstring, etc... I think those are the most common truss types but am not sure) which is why the article has redlinks, I put them there I think... Commons does have a category though: Commons:Category:Truss drawings, but they lack force annotation for the most part. ++Lar: t/c 13:57, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2nd paragraph 

message: Regarding this sentence: "The bowstring truss design fell out of favor due to a lack of durability, and gave way to the Pratt truss design, which was stronger."  This sentence is the only place in the article that a Pratt design is mentioned.  What is it?  My reason for asking is that I want to write an article about a specific bridge on the National Register of Historic Places; my documentation describes it as a "Pratt Through Truss bridge," and I'd like to be able to internally link to an article which would explain what that is.  Could anybody add a bit about it?  (Especially nice would be source citations, which the article currently lacks and is worse for it.)  Thanks for any help.  --Malepheasant 09:02, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Hawker Typhoon (and probably other aircraft) used a Pratt truss setup for the inner spars of the wing. . 2001:56A:F414:D300:6581:1AE5:5338:5FD0 (talk) 06:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pratt? Expansion request. 

message: In 1841, a patent was issued to Squire Whipple, for the invention of the first Iron-Truss Bridge.
Do you think we could add a mention about this invention? Thank you. Korismo 15:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Iron Truss Bridge 

message: Being a layman concerning bridge design, I may be wrong, but shouldn't the example for a deck truss bridge be one like :Image:I35W Bridge.jpg, with the road bed at the top of the structure, rather than :Image:Pulaski Skyway full view.jpg where a lot of the truss structure is higher than the roadway?  Or am I misinterpreting the definitions?--Appraiser 13:49, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deck Truss

message: I found Historic Bridges of Iowa which enumerates a bunch of different truss types.  I'm trying to get permission to lift a bunch of its content.  Is there a more public source of this information? Denimadept 20:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Something is needed.  For example, the term "Warren Truss" is used several times in the article without a definition (and "Warren Truss" pseudo-redirects here...--Rehcsif 18:17, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like an area for improvement.  List "types of truss" with a basic image (not a photograph) of the truss and an explanation of how that truss is different from some predecessor truss.  I'm no expert on this issue.  Looks like a need for Super Reference Librarian! - Denimadept 18:49, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

text: There.  From a couple of the External Links, I've extracted a list of different truss types.  Now for explanations and illustrations. - Denimadept 19:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I notice that someone got rid of the hierarchy I imposed to show the relationships of truss to progenator truss type.  Is it that such a relationship is an opinion rather than based on which-came-first, or is there some other reason? - Denimadept 21:16, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, I notice that the Brunel Truss and the Lenticular truss are listed separately but point to the same bridge.  Should these be merged? - Denimadept 21:19, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Types of truss 

message: It's in two places.  While it seems to belong there as the article is currently written, I think it'd make more sense to have it only in the location documenting the Bollman Truss. - Denimadept (talk) 22:23, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bollman Truss bridge image 

message: For someone with Photoshop, here are some examples that you could use as a bases for more graphics. Aboutmovies (talk) 09:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting handout you've got there.  Good stuff. - Denimadept (talk) 14:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples 

message: I have moved this text below from the article to this talk page because it does not seem to meet WP:NPOV or WP:NOR.
Faults in the design of the Howe truss were proved to be the cause of several railroad accidents in the United States. The most notable of these were the "Ashtabula Horror" in Ashtabula, Ohio, in 1876, and the "Forest Hills Disaster" in Boston, Massachusetts, in 1887.
The reason for moving the text is that it seems to assert that the prototypical design of the Howe truss was at fault for the accidents. If you read Ashtabula River Railroad Disaster, it places more blame on the use of steel and the lack of testing and inspection. Also, this reference for the Forest Hills Diaster again places more blame on the material, inspection and lack of knowledge of the particular designer about using iron in lieu of wood.
This makes the proposed text seem like it does not have a neutral point of view and may constitute original research if no references can be provided.
For these reasons, it seems that placing any text into the section about the generic Howe truss about these accidents will require proper qualifiers.. Any other thoughts? - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 22:24, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What made the truss design the fault? - Text moved here 

message: So what does that make this kind of (road) bridge?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuffed cat (talk • contribs) 17:26, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like a wrought[?] iron arch. It isn't made up of beams, so as I understand it it's not a truss bridge. Of course it would help if the footbridge weren't obstructing the view. Imaginatorium (talk) 18:28, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: A Question

message: The truss bridge used for northbound traffic on Interstate 95 between Fruitland and Payette, Idaho is soon to be removed to make way for either a second two lane concrete bridge or widening of the existing concrete two lane bridge currently used for southbound traffic. Right now the truss bridge is closed and two way traffic is routed over the southbound bridge. Bizzybody (talk) 06:56, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another truss bridge soon to be gone. 

message: Does this have single diagonals in compression (as this article suggests), or an X lattice of paired struts? per Houck Covered Bridge or :File:Howe Truss Pine Bluff Bridge, Spanning Big Walnut Creek, CR 950N, Bainbridge vicinity, Putnam County, IN00006a.jpg Surely the X lattice is a Town truss instead?
What's a "Modified Howe truss"?  Is that where the X frame arises?
Apart from the many timber examples, are there any in iron?  Any cast iron ones?  Andy Dingley (talk) 00:46, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The Houck Covered Bridge looks like a Brown truss.  I can't speak to the other.  I know of a metal Town lattice truss. - Denimadept (talk) 05:23, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Howe truss]] 

message: Can someone please explain the virtues of the K truss. Looks a right horrible thing IMHO, sticking a sideways bending force into that vertical. What's the point to it?  Andy Dingley (talk) 17:10, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  K truss 

message: I believe that we definitely need to make this article semi-protected as soon as possible. The revision history, to me just looks like a bunch of vandalism edits being reverted. I think it would spare some time for people if we protect it. Leoesb1032 (talk) 01:00, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:22, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need for Protection 

message: I ran across current instances of a parallel chord truss bridge (http://www.westernwoodstructures.com/index.php/timber-bridges/pedestrian-bridges/).  But this term is not part of the truss bridge article.  The instances look like what the Wikipedia article calls a Neville truss, repeated isosceles triangles (though I could be wrong).  But the article says Warren truss is superior to Neville.  So some brief discussion of the term parallel chord, its relation to Neville (if I'm right), why it's still used despite Warren being superior, seems in order.
Richard31416 (talk) 21:57, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: If you could research that and modify the article with the cites you find, that'd be good. - Denimadept (talk) 23:08, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: "Parallel chord" is just a descriptive term relating to the fact that the top and bottom chords are parallel. It has nothing to do with the type of truss separating the chords. Nice ref for pictures of beautiful timber bridges, though. Meters (talk) 20:38, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should the article explain or reference the parallel chord truss bridge, since it appears to be used in current construction? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Truss bridge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130607221909/http://www.king5.com/news/NTSB-Skagit-River-bridge-had-history-of-hits-209001771.html to http://www.king5.com/news/NTSB-Skagit-River-bridge-had-history-of-hits-209001771.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130512053920/http://oak.arch.utas.edu.au/projects/view_projectinfo.asp?projID=21 to http://oak.arch.utas.edu.au/projects/view_projectinfo.asp?projID=21
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110820203434/http://www.clrconstruction.com/buschingbridge.htm to http://www.clrconstruction.com/buschingbridge.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060904102208/http://www.dot.state.oh.us/se/coveredbridges/truss_types.htm to http://www.dot.state.oh.us/se/coveredbridges/truss_types.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:45, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Truss bridge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060905130514/http://matsuo-bridge.co.jp/english/bridges/basics/truss.shtm to http://www.matsuo-bridge.co.jp/english/bridges/basics/truss.shtm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060905130514/http://matsuo-bridge.co.jp/english/bridges/basics/truss.shtm to http://www.matsuo-bridge.co.jp/english/bridges/basics/truss.shtm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:01, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: The Ithiel Town through truss is mentioned in the Keniston Bridge article. Is there anything distinctive about this structure?--Dthomsen8 (talk) 21:01, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, and that's why it has its own article. We already discuss the lattice truss form in this article and in Lattice truss bridge Meters (talk) 21:59, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ithiel Town through truss 

message: Why is the Town lattice apparently the first truss bridge in the US according to the US History section? In every covered bridge book Ive ever read, the king and queen post were first, followed by the Burr arch truss. The Town lattice is usually presented as a more modern type. Even if you only want to talk about trusses developed in the US, and don't want to count the Burr arch truss because it's basically multiple kingposts and an arch, its not very useful as history. Forget kingposts, forget Burr, "the father of the covered bridge", all you need to know about early US trusses is that they were wood and invariably use iron rods for tension members; apparently the first and only type worth mentioning is the Town lattice of 1820. The end.
Actual text:
  Because wood was in abundance, early truss bridges would typically use carefully fitted timbers for members taking compression and iron rods for tension members, usually constructed as a covered bridge to protect the structure. In 1820 a simple form of truss, Town's lattice truss, was patented, and had the advantage of requiring neither high labor skills nor much metal. Few iron truss bridges were built in the United States before 1850. 
That is it. Nothing about the king/queenpost truss, Palmer or Burr truss, nothing about the Long truss, or the Howe truss. I don't see any point in this paragraph as written. I guess one could interpret it as "no REAL bridges were built in the US until 1850, because they were too busy mucking around with wooden trusses like the Town lattice".]
64.223.163.252 (talk) 19:53, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  US History 

message: We have around 130 articles that use the term "pin-connected" truss and/or bridge, but no good place to link that. There is Pin joint which redirects to Revolute joint, but isn't really specific to bridges or trusses. There is also Pin jointed truss which redirects to Truss (no specific section), which has some technical details on joints and forces.  This article mentions pin joints a coupld of times. 
I found this blog which explains how pin jointed truss bridges were easy to assemble, had other drawbacks, were replaced by riveted joints around WWI. This kind of info should be in the encyclopedia somewhere. Is anyone more knowledgeable and have some better sources? MB 04:50, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The big advantage to pin jointed trusses is that there can be no bending moments transferred at the joints. With some simplifying assumptions it is fairly easy to design a statically determinate pin-joined simple truss, in which each member is loaded only axially, and with a known load.  We should probably explain this point in Revolute joint. Meters (talk) 05:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: That's all on the engineering side. I would also like to see more on application/history side. MB 00:14, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "pin connected" joints 

message: What is truss bridge disadvantages  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.116.199.213 (talk) 17:04, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Technology