ME EN 2080 Mini Project 2, Summer 2016

This project requires a team approach for resolution. Teams of no less than 2 but no more than 3 people are
required to accomplish the resolution of this problem. Each team is required to submit a type-written report including at
a minimum sections for Introduction/Background, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion. Also include calculations,
graphs, illustrations, and any other items to make the teams point as to the conclusion obtained. Hand written
calculations may be included as an Appendix A after the body of your report. Include references that helped you develop
your calculations as Appendix B. Be sure to describe all assumptions as well as equations and methods used.

A gate at a stadium is 34 ft. long and just over 9 ft. high. It is constructed of two horizontal 4" x 6" x 3/16" thick
box beams (11.86 lb/ft) and sixty-eight vertical "pickets" which are 2" x 2" x 3/16" thick box beams (4.31 lb/ft), spaced 6
inches on center (for additional information on these box beams see tables on the following page from the Manual of
Steel Construction). The gates total weight was estimated, by an expert witness, to be a couple of tons (your group
should verify this). Is the exact weight of the gate very significant in your analysis? The gate was used before its installation
was completed and on closing, tipped and fell, seriously injuring the gate-attendant. In litigation, that followed, an expert
witness reported on measurements he made, where he had noted that the 4" x 6" Box Beams had a slight curvature
(concave out from the side to which the picket rails were welded). He claimed that this effectively moved the Center of
Gravity for the gate an additional inch or two (assume 2 inches) further from being above the small wheels on which
the gate moved to open or close (see sketches below). He hypothesized that, as a consequence, the gate would fall more
rapidly, giving the attendant less time to escape. He intimated that the supplier of the box beams must have provided
faulty beams to the manufacturer, causing this problem. He further stated that he had developed the dynamical equations

of motion for the problem, but he had as yet, been unable to find the correct integral formula to obtain a numerical
answer for the time required for the gate to fall. Still, he was sure the time to fall would be reduced by the faulty
tubing. In summary, the hypothesis by the expert witness was:
The curvature of the gates horizontal members (which he attributed to faulty Box Beams as delivered from the
steel producer) moved the C.G. approximately one to two inches further over from above the pivot-point resulting
in the gate falling more rapidly, giving the attendant less time to escape.
Your problem is to make reasonable assumptions and obtain an answer for the time of fall, both for
straight/normal and curved box beams as described by the expert witness. Also design a simple experiment that could be
used in a demonstration to convince reasonable individuals that your calculated time to fall is reasonably correct (hence
one might expect the value of t to also be reasonable). You need not perform this experiment nor report its results, but
we may want to select one of the tests described and conduct it in class. Describe the model used in your analyses in some
detail and discuss both the significance of these times and their difference. Does the described displacement of the C.G.
make a significant difference in the time of fall? Would you anticipate that a person would likely be able to escape the
ideal falling-gate were he next to it and not anticipating its falling? Does the difference in fall time for a gate with curved
beams significantly decrease his ability to escape the falling gate? Comment on possible causes (other than the cross
member being curved when shipped from the steel plant) of the box beams curvature? Cite any references you need to
justify your conclusions. Do you think the manufacture of the steel beams was culpable?
Observations/Assumptions: (1) One end of the gate had a small wheel affixed to the upper 4" x 6" box beam that
traveled in a rack-track that served to hold the gate upright. An unfinished aspect of the gate was the stop in this track,
that was to serve to prevent the gate from traveling beyond the track end, but this had not yet been welded in place. (2)
Assume that as a result of the curvature in the members discussed previously, the C.G. for the actual gate is an additional
2 inches outward. (3) The supporting wheels run in a shallow guide-trough. The weights of the wheels, bearings, and their
supports may be neglected in your analysis.
The following are parts of tables photocopied from The Manual of Steel Construction 7th edition pages 1-103 and1106, published periodically by the American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc.