What type of struts are best?
There isn’t a universal “best” strut; the right choice depends on the application, loads, environment, and budget.
Struts can refer to structural members in construction, components in aerospace or automotive design, or the Apache Struts web framework. Each context has its own criteria for performance, reliability, and maintenance.
Structural struts: choosing for buildings and bridges
In civil engineering, struts are compression members that carry axial loads and can govern buckling behavior. The best option blends strength, stiffness, durability, and constructibility within budget.
Key considerations when choosing structural struts include material properties, cross-section geometry, end conditions, and length relative to buckling risk. The main choices and when they’re typically favored are below.
- Hollow tubular sections (steel or aluminum): Excellent torsional stiffness, good buckling resistance, and straightforward fabrication; circular or square/rectangular tubes are common in frame structures.
- Rectangular/square tubes: High bending rigidity at corners, easy to connect with plates and bolts; useful where right-angle joints dominate.
- Solid bars or rods: Higher gross strength per member in some oversize loads, but heavier and less buckling-efficient than tubes.
- Timber and engineered wood: Cost-effective in light-to-moderate loads, with favorable fire performance in some designs; moisture and decay must be managed.
- Composite struts (carbon fiber or glass fiber): Very high strength-to-weight ratios and stiffness, but higher material cost and potential damage detection considerations.
- Lattice or truss-based struts (steel or composite): For long spans or high stiffness with lower material weight, often used with other members in a framework.
In practice, engineers use structural analysis to select cross-sections and materials that satisfy buckling limits (Euler buckling, slenderness), local stresses, and connection details. Corrosion protection, availability, and constructibility also guide the final choice.
Deeper dive: materials and cross-sections
Extra care is given to end-conditions (pinned vs. fixed), slenderness ratios, and inspection regimes. Tube sections often win out in framed structures for their combination of stiffness and ease of fabrication, while timber can be preferred in lighter, sustainable designs with appropriate moisture control.
Bottom line: the “best” structural strut is the one that meets performance targets while fitting the project’s constructability and budget constraints.
Aerospace and automotive struts: weight, stiffness, and durability
In aerospace and high-performance automotive design, struts must endure fatigue, temperature variations, and harsh environments while minimizing weight. The best choice balances material properties with manufacturing realities and cost.
Considerations include stiffness-to-weight ratio, fatigue life, corrosion resistance, compatibility with joints, and cost. The common materials and configurations are listed below.
- Aluminum alloy tubes (e.g., 7075-T6, 2024-T3): Widely used for a good balance of strength, weight, and manufacturability; easy to join with rivets or bolts.
- Titanium tubes (e.g., Ti-6Al-4V): Higher strength-to-weight and excellent corrosion resistance, but more expensive and harder to manufacture.
- Carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) tubes: Exceptional stiffness-to-weight, fatigue resistance, and tailorability; expensive and require specialized inspection and repair.
- Glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) tubes: Lower cost and good fatigue performance for less demanding loads; not as stiff as CFRP.
- Hybrid or sandwich structures: CFRP skins with core materials to optimize weight and stiffness for certain components (e.g., wing struts, landing gear components).
Practical design decisions also hinge on manufacturing capabilities, repairability, and supply chain stability. Engineers often use finite element analysis to compare candidate struts and test prototypes under representative loads.
In sum, aerospace and automotive applications favor lightweight, high-stiffness materials with proven fatigue performance, accepting higher cost when warranted by performance or safety requirements.
Apache Struts: choosing the right web framework
In software, Struts refers to the Apache Struts web application framework. The “best” choice depends on project goals, team expertise, and security posture. For new projects, modern alternatives or newer versions are usually recommended over legacy setups.
Below are the main options and considerations for teams contemplating Struts usage:
- Struts 2 (the current maintained line): A modern, interceptor-based framework that builds on Struts 1’s ideas with improved configuration and integration with Java standard technologies; widely used in legacy enterprise apps that require Struts foundations.
- Struts 1: Legacy framework; end-of-life; not recommended for new development unless maintaining an existing system that cannot be migrated.
- Security posture: Apache Struts has had critical vulnerabilities in the past; ensure patched versions, follow best-practice deployment, and apply security updates promptly.
- Alternatives: Consider Spring MVC / Spring Boot, Jakarta EE (JSF, MVC), or other modern frameworks that better align with current ecosystems and dev-ops practices.
Ultimately, for new development, the best practice is to use a modern framework with active community, robust security updates, and a long-term maintenance plan. For existing Struts-based systems, plan a cautious migration strategy to mitigate risk while keeping business operations running.
In short, while Struts 2 remains the supported path for legacy apps, many teams opt for more contemporary frameworks for new projects to simplify development and security management.
Bottom line: A decision framework
Across contexts, a practical decision framework helps determine the best strut type: define the load case, environment, and life cycle; estimate weight and stiffness requirements; assess fabrication and maintenance costs; and evaluate joints and connections. Run scenarios or prototypes to compare performance and cost over the project lifetime.
Summary
The answer to what type of struts are best is context-dependent. Structural engineers lean toward hollow tubes and engineered composites for efficiency and durability; aerospace and automotive design favors lightweight, stiff materials such as CFRP and aerospace-grade aluminum or titanium; software developers align with the supported, secure, and actively maintained framework—Struts 2 or alternatives—depending on project needs. By analyzing loads, environment, maintenance, and cost, you can select the best strut for your application.
