ME2113-1

DEFLECTION AND BENDING STRESSES IN BEAMS

(EA-02-21)


INFORMAL REPORT





SEMESTER 3

2011/2012



Name: Sahil Anil Patel
Matric no. : A0071443M
October 28, 2011
Group 202







NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
OBJECTIVES:

1. To analyse beam theory experimentally by loading a cantilever and studying the
resulting stresses and deflection.
2. To deduce the Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio of the beam from the
experimental results.
3. To investigate in terms of their relation to each other, the magnitude and signs of
the strains and stresses at two locations along the cantilever beam with respect
to beam theory.






SAMPLE CALCULATIONS:

Part 1

Sample calculations for the loading of 250g

Calculation of second moment of area, IZ


I
z
=
1
12
bh
3
=
(25.6)(6.06)
3
12
= 474.76 mm
4
= 4.747610
10
m
4



Calculation of Youngs Modulus, E



v
L
=
PL
3
3EI
z
P =
3EI
z
L
3
(v
L
)


From graph 1, gradient = 5.8096 N/mm = 5809.6 N/m


3EI
z
L
3
= 5809.6
E = 5809.6
L
3
3I
z
|
\

|
.
|
= 5809.6
0.25
3
3(4.747610
10
|
\

|
.
|
= 63.7310
9
Pa = 63.73 GPa



At x = 50mm
Theoretical Calculation for bending moment, MXZ

M
xz
= - P (L x)
= - 2.45 (0.25 0.05)
= - 0.49 Nm

Calculation of theoretical longitudinal stress, xx1

o
xx1
=
M
xz
I
z
|
\

|
.
|
h
2
|
\

|
.
|
=
0.49
4.747610
10
|
\

|
.
|
6.0610
3
2
|
\

|
.
|
= 3.12710
6
Pa
= 3.127 MPa

Calculation of experimental longitudinal stress, xx1


o
xx1
= Ec
xx1
= 63.7310
9
46.5 10
-6
= 2.9610
6
Pa
= 2.96 MPa


At x = 150mm
Calculation for bending moment, MXZ


M
xz
= - P (L x)
= - 2.45 (0.25 0.15)
= - 0.245 Nm

Calculation of theoretical longitudinal stress, xx2


o
xx 2
=
M
xz
I
z
|
\

|
.
|
h
2
|
\

|
.
|
=
0.245
4.747610
10
|
\

|
.
|
6.0610
3
2
|
\

|
.
|
=1.564 10
6
Pa
=1.564 MPa



Calculation of experimental longitudinal stress,
xx2


o
xx2
= Ec
xx2
= 63.7310
9
2110
-6
=1.3410
6
Pa
=1.34 MPa



Calculation of Poissons ratio, v


c
zz
= -

c
xx


1
= 0.304

2
= 0.312

Hence, from the gradients of the two lines in graph 2,

1
= 0.304

2
= 0.312

Thus, poissons ratio, =

0.304 + 0.312
2
= 0.308


Part 2

Slope of graph 3
Equation of graph 3 is y = 0.0539x 0.0492


Since
xx1
is in microns

,
Therefore, slope of graph = 0.0539 x 10
6
N

Highest reading
xx1
= 800 x 10
-6

Evaluation of handgrip force

From Graph3, P = 0.0539 10
6
x
xx1

Thus, handgrip force = 0.0539 x 10
6
x 800 x 10
-6
= 43.12 N












DISCUSSION:


1. Comment on the signs of the strains (c
xx1,
c
zz1,
c
xx2
and c
zz2
) with respect to the location
and orientation of the strain gauges and how the beam is loaded.

In this experiment, there are 4 strain gauges, where both,
xx1
and
zz1
are mounted on
the top and both
xx2
and
zz2
are mounted on the bottom of the beam. Strain gauges
xx

are in the axial direction and
zz
are in the transverse direction. Also, the beam is
experiencing a loading such that it bends downwards. So, by beam theory axial loading
will cause contraction in the transverse direction as shown by the equation of Poissons
ratio


c
zz
= u
o
xx
E
= uc
xx
. Henceforth as strain along axial direction increases, so
will the strain along the transverse direction decreases.

For
xx1,
the value is positive because this strain gauge is being placed on top of the
beam. Since the beam is experiencing tensile stress on the top surface, a positive strain
value indicates an elongation in length along the axial direction.

xx2
is negative as it is place on the bottom side of the beam. Since the beam is
experiencing compressive at the bottom, a negative strain value indicates a reduction in
length along the axial direction.

Since
xx1,
is positive,
zz1
will be negative as shown by the equation of Poissons ratio (


c
zz
= u
o
xx
E
= uc
xx
). Similarly, since
xx2,
is negative,
zz1
will be positive.

2. With reference to Graph 4, comment on the slopes of the six theoretical lines and also on
how stress varies with beam location.

Graph 4 shows steeper slope as the load applied increases. This is because when a
larger load is applied, the cantilever beam is bent more, so the stress at a specific point
increases. The negative gradient means that the stresses decrease as strain gauge
location (x) increases. The stress decreases to 0 MPa when x = 0.25m since at the end
of the beam the deflection equation has to satisfy boundary conditions so there is no
stress experience at the free end.

3. Comment on the accuracy of your handgrip force.

The handgrip force is generally inaccurate due to possible experimental errors. Firstly, if
the tensile or compressive force in the gripper is too high, it will not translate the
handgrip force accurately into strain as strain gauges has only a certain range of
accuracy,
Secondly, we are unable to maintain a constant gripping force, thus, the strain value is
always fluctuating.



Conclusion:

Firstly, the objective for our experiment is met. For our experiment an aluminum specimen is
provided. From experimental results Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio are 63.73 GPa and
0.308 respectively. Comparing this to a typical aluminum material the Youngs modulus and
Poissons ratio are 63.73GPa and 0.308 respectively. Henceforth our results are relatively close
and accurate.

Secondly, in accordance to equation of Poissons ratio strain gauge values in the axial direction
is always of opposite sign to the strain gauge value in the transverse direction on the same side
of the beam. And, by beam theory axial loading will cause contraction along transverse
direction.

Thirdly, in accordance to beam theory we observed the relationship between strain and stress. It
is when a larger load is applied a specific point, the cantilever beam is bent more, so the stress
at a specific point increases. In addition, the stresses decrease as strain gauge location
increases along the length of the beam, which evidently shows that the largest bending moment
and stress occurs at the cantilever end.

Finally, in this experiment we learnt that stress cannot be measured directly, however it can be
calculated by obtaining its bending deflection and strain using dial gauge and strain gauges
respectively. Also, we managed to learn that in the designing of beams, we have to consider a
few factor namely, its cross-sectional area, length of beam and its material (for which different
material will have a different Youngs modulus, E and Poissons ratio, v).