ULA Challenge Bracket

I started this design challenge with the bare minimum requirements. For this project, the bare minimum material requirement is the 2D minimum edge distance around all holes, except hole pattern E, which would violate the material envelope if the minimum edge distance requirement was met. Based on comments from the judges, the maximum edge distance that could fit in the material envelope was used for hole pattern E. When viewing the part normal to datum A, it becomes apparent that a bridge is the most efficient load shape. The uniform load on datum B is counteracted by the forces exerted by the two supports. The maximum moment is found at these supports, going to zero in the middle of the part. Based on this, a curved I-beam was used to support the load and connect both sides of the bracket. It was cut such that it would fit within the material envelope. From a side view, it is also apparent that the load applies a moment to the supports. Again, I used a design similar to an I-beam to carry the moment and connect to the bridge piece. Within the material envelope, it is difficult to distribute load evenly between the upper and lower bolt hole, so a generous fillet and wide flange was used. Fillets were applied wherever possible to negate stress concentrations. The through hole sizes specified in the drawing, 0.22” and 0.27”, correspond to clearance holes for #10 and 1/4” fasteners, respectively. Assuming socket head cap screws were used, this would give a head diameter of 0.312” for the #10 bolts. However, it is likely that a washer could also be used, which could be up to 0.5”. Clearance for this was accounted for in the design. Socket clearance of 0.7” was used for nut access since this is adequate clearance for a typical 3/8” drive socket. Load calculations were performed in Solidworks Simulation. As the instructions indicated, hole pattern D was used to fix the part. This fixed geometry necessarily generated excessive loads at and around the hole, and these loads