COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

Group Members; Kamogelo Lesole

Michelle M. Matlapeng
Bobby K. Ramontsho

14000381
14001351
14000488

PROGRAMME; BEng Mechanical &Aerospace

PRACTICAL; TORSION IN RODS AND TUBES

Introduction
Torsion is a moment that twists a structure or body (Holmes, 2016). It occurs when an object, a rod or
tube or even a bar in cross-section is subjected to a twist/torque force.
This torque is distributed over the cross section of the structure and creates a shear strain and stress.

Some application of torsional analysis in engineering structures include: beams, shafts and airplane
wings. These components are subjected to a lot of torque when in use hence it is vitally for the
structures to be analyzed to avoid structural failure such as fracture. As such, in this experiment we
would be using the HST22 equipment comprising of an HDA200 Interface to calibrate the torque force
and angle of rotation and some specimens of varying cross-sectional areas to study how torsion affects
each specimen, and determining their modulus of rigidity.
(P.A.Hilton Ltd, 2011) (Wolfram, 2016)

Figure 2

(P.A Hilton ltd Engineering Teaching Equipment, 2011)

Objectives
1. To investigate the torsional rigidity, G of solid and hollow circular rods.
2. To investigate the torsional constant, J for the square torsional specimen and the
aluminum torsional specimen with a slit down its length.

Theory
The modulus of rigidity G (N/m2) of a specimen undergoing torsion is given by the following standard
equation:
[1]
Whereby:
= Slope of graph, with in radians
=
, (mm)
=

[2]

Whereby:
, mm
The torsional constant J (N/mm2) for aluminum tube with a slit is given by:
[3]
Whereby:

The torsional constant J (N/mm2) for the square aluminum specimen is given by:
[4]
Whereby:

Conversion of the twist angle in degrees to radians:

Apparatus

HDA200 Interface
HST22
Chuck key
Measuring Tape

Procedure
Part 1
Used a chuck-key to open the jaws of the chuck and fitted the aluminum rod, 4.74 mm torsional
specimen between the chucks of the torsional head and load cell head. Recorded the gauge length of
the specimen (distance between chucks for this specimen) and turned the hand wheel on the torsion
head until the lever arm just rests on the load cell. The HDA200 interface displays connected to the load
cell would show a change in force as the lever arm is touched on the load cell. Zeroed the HDA200
interface and recorded the no load force reading and angle reading in Table 1 for each gradually turn
the hand wheel to increase the twist on the specimen by increments of approximately 1 N, up to a
maximum of 10 N.
Part 2
Inserted the clamp brushes on chuck and repeated the whole procedure from Part 1 on the acrylic
specimen. The chucks were slightly tightened, as the ends of the specimen could have been damaged.
The readings were taken by increments of 1 N up to a maximum of 10 N into Table 2 from the HDA200
interface.
Part 3
Replaced the acrylic specimen with the aluminum tube and repeated the whole procedure of Part 1. The
readings were taken by increments of 1 N up to a maximum of 10 N into Table 3 from the HDA200
interface.
Part 4
Replaced the aluminum specimen with the split tube and repeated the whole procedure of Part 1. The
readings were taken by increments of 1 N up to a maximum of 16 N into Table 4 from the HDA200
interface.
Part 5
Replaced the split tube specimen with the square section and repeated the whole procedure of Part
1.The readings were taken by increments of 2 N up to a maximum of 20 N into Table 5 from the HDA200
interface.

Results and processing

Solid Aluminum rod
Load, F, [N] Torque,
[Nmm]

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

0
65
130
195
260
325
390
455
520
585
650

HDA200 Actual
Twist
twist
(Deg)
(Deg)

Actual
Twist
(Radians)

569.2
569.4
569.4
569.4
569.5
569.6
569.7
569.9
570.0
570.1
570.2

0.000
-0.003
-0.003
-0.003
-0.005
-0.007
-0.009
-0.012
-0.014
-0.016
-0.017

0.0
-0.2
-0.2
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
-0.7
-0.8
-0.9
-1.0

Table 1

Angle of twist vs torque

0.2

0.0
0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Actual twist (Deg)

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8
y = -0.0015x + 0.0182

-1.0

-1.2
Figure 1

Applied Torque

700

Gauge length; 388mm

Diameter; 4.74mm
Gradient: (-0.0015)*
J=

=2.62*10-5

= 49.5579mm4

=299 060N/mm2

G= =
Acrylic rod
Load, F, Torque,
[N]
[Nmm]

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Table 2

0
65
130
195
260
325
390
455
520
585
650

HDA200 Actual
Twist
twist
(Deg)
(Deg)

Actual
Twist
(Radians)

576.4
577.8
579.0
579.8
581.6
582.9
584.1
585.3
586.6
587.8
589.1

0.000
-0.024
-0.045
-0.059
-0.091
-0.113
-0.134
-0.155
-0.178
-0.199
-0.222

0.0
-1.4
-2.6
-3.4
-5.2
-6.5
-7.7
-8.9
-10.2
-11.4
-12.7

Angle of twist vs Applied torque

0.0
0

100

200

300

400

500

600

-2.0

Angle of twist (deg)

-4.0

-6.0

-8.0

-10.0

-12.0
y = -0.0196x - 0.0091
-14.0

Applied Torque(Nmm)

Figure 2

Diameter= 10mm
Gauge length; 386mm
Gradient; (-0.0196)*
J=
G= =

=3.421*10-4

=981.7478mm4
=1149.35N/mm2

700

Aluminum Tube
Load, F, Torque,
[N]
[Nmm]

0
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

0
130
195
260
325
390
455
520
585
650

HDA200 Actual
Twist
twist
(Deg)
(Deg)

Actual
Twist
(Radians)

636.7
638.2
639.0
639.8
640.5
641.4
642.1
643.0
643.6
644.4

0
-0.026
-0.040
-0.054
-0.066
-0.082
-0.094
-0.110
-0.120
-0.134

0.0
-1.5
-2.3
-3.1
-3.8
-4.7
-5.4
-6.3
-6.9
-7.7

Table 3

Angle of twist vs Applied torque

1.0
0.0
0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Angle off twist(Deg)

-1.0
-2.0
-3.0
-4.0
-5.0
-6.0
-7.0
y = -0.0119x + 0.0156

-8.0
-9.0

Applied Torque(Nmm)

Figure 3
Diameter; Inner Diameter; 6.3mm
Outer Diameter; 9.5mm
Gradient; (-0.0119*
Gauge Length; 350mm

)=2.078*10-4

700

J=

=644.985mm4
=26 127N/mm4

G= =
Split tube
Load, F, Torque,
[N]
[Nmm]

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

0
65
130
195
260
325
390
455
520
585

HDA200 Actual
Twist
twist
(Deg)
(Deg)

Actual
Twist
(Radians)

709.0
710.5
711.8
713.2
714.7
716.1
717.6
719.0
720.4
722.0

0.000
-0.026
-0.049
-0.073
-0.099
-0.124
-0.150
-0.175
-0.199
-0.227

0.0
-1.5
-2.8
-4.2
-5.7
-7.1
-8.6
-10.0
-11.4
-13.0

Table 4

Actual Twist vs Applied Torque

2.0
0.0
0

100

200

300

400

500

Angle of twist(Deg)

-2.0
-4.0
-6.0
-8.0
-10.0
-12.0
y = -0.0221x + 0.0309
-14.0
Figure 4

Applied Torque

600

700

Diameter; 7.09mm nominal

Thickness; 1.6mm nominal
=3.857*10-4

Gradient=(-0.0221)*
Gauge length=374mm
J=

=
=30.411mm4

G=

=(3.87*10 -4 )-1
=31 883.9N/mm2

Square hollow Aluminum Section

Load, F, Torque, HDA200 Actual
[N]
[Nmm] Twist
twist
(Deg)
(Deg)

Actual
Twist
(Radians)

0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20

0.0000
-0.0017
-0.0017
-0.0052
-0.0070
-0.0087
-0.0105
-0.0122
-0.0140
-0.0157
-0.0175

Table 5

0
130
260
390
520
650
780
910
1040
1170
1300

689.6
689.7
689.7
689.9
690.0
690.1
690.2
690.3
690.4
690.5
690.6

0.0
-0.1
-0.1
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
-0.7
-0.8
-0.9
-1.0

Angle of twist vs Applied torque

0.2

0.0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Angle of twist(Deg)

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8

-1.0

y = -0.0008x + 0.0227

-1.2

Applied Torque(Nmm)

Figure 5

External size=a=12.7nominal
Internal size=b=9.44 nominal
Gradient; (-0.0008)*

Gauge Length; 385mm

J=
=
=(

=2 211.2mm4
G= (-0.00001396)-1

= 12 469.91N/mm2

1400

Observations
Specimen

Modulus of rigidity,
Theoretical
value(N/mm2)

Aluminum Rod
Acrylic Rod
Aluminum Tube
Aluminum Split Tube
Square Hollow Aluminum

26 200
1 200
26 200
26 200
26 200

Modulus Of
rigidity,
Experimental
value
(N/mm2)
299 060
1 149
26 127
31 884
12 470

Error (%)

1 041.45
4.25
0.28
21.69
52.40

Table 6

The graphs from the experimental values exhibit linear behavior except split aluminum tube.
From table 6, acrylic rod and aluminum tube proved similar results for both experimental and
theoretical values. Acrylic rod experimental value of modulus of rigidity is 1149N/mm2 compared to its
theoretical value of 1200N/mm2. Aluminum tube experimental value was 26 127N/mm2 compared to
the theoretical value of 26 200N/mm2. The other specimens do not agree with the theoretical values.
The aluminum rod experimental value 299 060N/mm2 compared to theoretical value of 26 200N/mm2
giving an error of more than 1 000%. The aluminum split tube experimental value is 31 884N/mm2
compared to the theoretical value of 26 200N/mm2 giving an error of more than 20%. The square hollow
aluminum tube experimental value was 12 470N/mm2 compared to theoretical value of 26 200N/mm2
giving an error o more than 50%.the acrylic rod and aluminum tube error percentage is small while the
aluminum rod, aluminum split tube and square hollow aluminum values exhibit high error percentage.
This could be due to;

Inaccuracy of the apparatus

Improper use of the apparatus, over tightening or loose tightening of the chucks
The specimen already experienced permanent shear strain

The maximum shear stress is 100N/mm2.the maximum torque is calculated using the formula

Torque carried per mm2= for a solid rod

Aluminum rod
Diameter=4.74mm
Radius=2.37mm
J=49.5579mm4

Nmm

Torque carried per mm2 =

Aluminum Tube
Outer diameter; 9.5mm
Outer radius; 4.75mm
J=644.985mm4

=118.50N/mm

Inner diameter; 6.3mm

Inner radius; 3.15mm

.
=40 312Nmm
Torque carried per mm2=

=1015N/mm

Aluminum Split tube

Outer diameter; 7.09mm nominal Thickness; 1.6mm nominal
Outer radius; 3.545mm Inner radius; 2.745mm
J=30.411mm4

Inner diameter=5.49mm

.
=3 801.4Nmm
Torque carried per mm2=
Hollow square aluminum
External size; 12.7mm nominal
J=2211.2mm4

=240.5N/mm

Internal size; 9.44mm nominal

.
=67 828.2Nmm
Torque carried per mm2 =

=939.8N/mm

Rom the above calculations aluminum tube experiences more torque per unit area, which is equal to
1015Nmm/mm2 hence its more economic. The aluminum rod experiences a torque of 118Nmm/mm2
which means its the least economical because more material will be needed to support the same
amount of torque as the other specimen.

CONCLUSIONS
The simple theory of torsion applies to both circular section rods and tubes.
The optimum way of designing for torsion for;
Maximum torque within a set diameter is to design a specimen which is hollow, as this kind of
specimen sustains the most torque for a given unit area
The lightest member for a given shear stress is to design a hollow shape.
A large rotation is to design a member in tubular form
Torsional rigidity for aluminum rod is 299 060N/mm2, acrylic rod is 1 149N/mm2, aluminum tube is 26
127N/mm2, aluminum split tube is 31 884N/mm2 and for square hollow aluminum it is 12 470N/mm2.
The torsional constant, J for square hollow aluminum is 2 211mm4 and for slit down the aluminum is
30mm4.

Bibliography
P.A Hilton ltd Engineering Teaching Equipment. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.p-a-hilton.co.uk:
http://www.p-a-hilton.co.uk/tech-education/el_hst22-163_230611023111.jpg
P.A.Hilton Ltd. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.p-a-hilton.co.u: http://www.p-ahilton.co.uk/products/HST22-Torsion-of-Rods-and-Tubes
Wolfram. (2016). Retrieved from http://reference.wolfram.com:
http://reference.wolfram.com/applications/structural/TorsionalAnalysis.html
Hibbeler, R. (2011). Mechanics of Materials. In R. Hibbeler, Mechanics of Materials. Pearson Prentice
Hal.
Holmes, P. D. (2016). Boston University Mechanical Engineering. Retrieved from http://www.bu.edu:
http://www.bu.edu/moss/mechanics-of-materials-torsion/