I would be lead to believe that a pyramid would be the best, because the design would spread the load out equally throughout the structure. Give me your opinions with reasons why, possibly cited sources.
2006-06-30 11:07:48 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Engineering
also about wind, I seen something on history or discovery channel, i forgot which, where it showed a small to-scale pyramid in a wind tunnel with smoke injected, and the wind created a vortex behind the pyramid.
2006-07-02 15:06:43 · update #1
A pyramid would be an good support for a load on top. It would distribute the load to a broad base thereby allowing a low soil bearing pressure. However, if the load on top was of any height or subject to wind loads, the pointed top would have to be changed to provide a flat surface that could be used to anchor the load. We seldom see pyramids as support structures because that would be too expensive to construct. Instead we see columns, rectangles and other shapes in buildings or power lines. In considering a structure to support a load, economy is important. You have the right concept of supporting the load on a broad base if the soils are weak.
2006-07-02 08:36:48 · answer #1 · answered by Patrick 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think previous respondent is right about cone. However structural materials are strong in compression so taper might only need to be slight (more a column) to carry weight of structure above. One has to watch wind loads and buckling risk. Electricity pylons are perhaps a good example of a very economical practical approach to this problem.
2006-06-30 18:28:40 · answer #2 · answered by Robert A 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A pyramid ! there are enough leaning towers of >>>>>>Pisa etc.
2006-06-30 20:22:46 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
cone would be even better than pyramid - no corners to accumulate the stress.
2006-06-30 18:12:29 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
an arch !!!
2006-06-30 18:13:44 · answer #5 · answered by eltivo0210 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋