Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education (Tsing Yi)

Department of Construction
Laboratory Report

Experiment Title: Lateral Deflection of Steel Frame

Date: 4 November, 2015
Time: 10:00am to 11:30am
Programme/Class: EG314101 / 2PD01
Group No.: 3

Reported by:
Signed by the
Student Name Student Number Contribution
student
1 Wong Tsz Him 140695283 20%
2 Lo Hiu Tung 140695271 20%
3 Chu Ka Long 140695295 20%
4 Woo Hin Hung 140695480 20%
5 Lo Hung Fei 140695535 20%
Total: 100%
EG314101-2PD01 IVE(TY) Lateral Deflection of Steel Frame

Objective:
1. To determine experimentally the deflection of a 5-storey structural frame model
under lateral loading.
2. To identify the mode of deformation of the frame.
3. To study the load-deflection behavior of the frame.
4. To study the linearity of the steel frame.
5. To acquire experimental data.
6. To compare the experimental results with that of the theoretical values calculated
by using a structural analysis program such as STAAD-PRO or NIDA.

Scope of Work:
1. Carry out the loading test of a steel frame.
2. Record all experimental data.
3. Produce a report for the works mentioned above.

Apparatus:
1. A steel frame made of stainless steel plates with dimensions as shown in Figure
1.
2. Standard weights (5 kg each)
3. Displacement Transducers (LVDT) for measuring displacement (mm).
4. Data logger for the acquisition of test data.

Page.2
EG314101-2PD01 IVE(TY) Lateral Deflection of Steel Frame

Procedures:
1. Record the serial number of each LVDT at positions vertically above points A,
B, C, D&E.
2. Place the weight hangers onto the hooks at points A, B, C, D&E.
3. Reset the readings of the data logger before adding standard weights.
4. Place a 5 kg standard weight to each hanger. Slightly tap the frame to ensure that
the LVDTs are responding properly. After the frame becomes steady, press the
data logger button to print out the LWT readings and then enter the readings into
the corresponding cells in Table 1.
5. Increase the weight on each hanger by repeating step 4 until the total weight on
each hanger is 30 kg. Record the LVDT readings for each loading case after each
weight increment.
6. Remove all the standard weights from the frame.
7. Reset the readings of the data logger.
8. Place a 5 kg standard weight to the hanger at E. After the frame becomes steady,
press the data logger button to print out the LVDT readings and then enter the
readings into the corresponding cells in Table 1.
9. Increase the weight on the hanger at E by repeating step 8 until the total weight
on the hanger at E is 45 kg. Record the LVDT readings for each loading case
after each weight increment.

Page.3
EG314101-2PD01 IVE(TY) Lateral Deflection of Steel Frame

Results:
Table 1: Displacement Transducers Readings
Weight Data Logger Output Readings (mm)
Weight
on LVDT E
Loading on LVDT A LVDT B LVDT C LVDT D
hangers Serial #
Case hanger at Serial # Serial # Serial # Serial #
at A to D (BBD035
E (kg) (518962) (518959) (518961) (518958)
(kg) 79)
A(0) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
A(1) 5 5 0.17 0.54 0.85 1.08 1.20
A(2) 10 10 0.34 1.08 1.71 2.15 2.40
A(3) 15 15 0.51 1.62 2.56 3.24 3.59
A(4) 20 20 0.68 2.16 3.43 4.32 4.79
A(5) 25 25 0.86 2.70 4.28 5.39 5.98
A(6) 30 30 1.03 3.25 5.15 6.47 7.17

B(0) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

B(1) 0 5 0.03 0.13 0.24 0.34 0.43
B(2) 0 10 0.08 0.27 0.48 0.70 0.88
B(3) 0 15 0.11 0.40 0.72 1.05 1.31
B(4) 0 20 0.15 0.54 0.96 1.39 1.74
B(5) 0 25 0.19 0.67 1.19 1.74 2.18
B(6) 0 30 0.23 0.81 1.45 2.09 2.62
B(7) 0 35 0.27 0.94 1.69 2.44 3.05
B(8) 0 40 0.31 1.08 1.93 2.79 3.48
B(9) 0 45 0.34 1.21 2.17 3.14 3.91

Page.4
EG314101-2PD01 IVE(TY) Lateral Deflection of Steel Frame

Deflection Calculation using Computer Program:

We use STAAD_PRO to analyze the structural frame. The following values for the
elastic properties of stainless steel are to be used.
The modules of elasticity E=205000N/mm
The Poissons ratio =0.3

Page.5
EG314101-2PD01 IVE(TY) Lateral Deflection of Steel Frame

Discussion of Results:
1. Plot the measured deflections at each storey level under different
loading conditions.

LOAD CASE A
Hanger A Hanger B Hanger C Hanger D Hanger E

9.00

8.00

7.00
DEFLECTION (MM)

6.00

5.00

4.00

3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
WEIGHT ON HANGERS AT A TO E (KG)

LOAD CASE B
Hanger A Hanger B Hanger C Hanger D Hanger E

9.00

8.00

7.00
DEFLECTION (MM)

6.00

5.00

4.00

3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
WEIGHT ON HANGER AT E (KG)

Page.6
EG314101-2PD01 IVE(TY) Lateral Deflection of Steel Frame

2. Comment on the deflected shape of the frame

In Loading Case A, it shows that the deflected shape of the frame. The loading of
A to E is increased in the same weight. For instance, A is the minimum loading,
then E is the maximum. Therefore, the deflected shape of point A to point E is
increasing. It means A is the deformation, E is the maximum. The cause is the
distance from support to A, B, C, D, E are increasing. Consequently, the shortest
distance is from support to A as the deformation is the minimum. Secondly, the
longest distance is from support to E since the deformation is the maximum.

In Loading Case B, the weights on hangers A to D are 0kg, but the weight in E is
increased. Only the deformation at E is increased because the loading is
increased. Therefore, if the point load increase, the deformation will also
increase.

3. Comment on the linearity of the frame.

According to Loading Case A in the graph, the linearity of A to E are similar to
straight line. The slope from A to E is increasing. The loading of A is minimum
so the slope at A is minimum. Then, the loading at E is maximum since the slope
at E is maximum. Every point are included loading and the deformation is
progressively increase so appear the straight line.

According to Loading Case B in the graph, the linearity of A to D are not a

straight line. And only loading on E, so only E is a straight line. Therefore, A to
D appear tortuous are affected by the loading at point E. Point A to D are not
contain loadings and the deformation is not progressively increase since not
appear the straight line.

Page.7
EG314101-2PD01 IVE(TY) Lateral Deflection of Steel Frame

4. Plot the theoretical deflections at each storey level under different

loading conditions on the same plot of (1).

LOAD CASE A
Hanger A Hanger B Hanger C Hanger D Hanger E

7
DEFLECTION (MM)

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
WEIGHT ON HANGERS AT A TO E (KG)

LOAD CASE B
Hanger A Hanger B Hanger C Hanger D Hanger E

9.00

8.00

7.00
Deflection (MM)

6.00

5.00

4.00

3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Weight on hanger at E (kg)

Page.8
EG314101-2PD01 IVE(TY) Lateral Deflection of Steel Frame

5. Compare the theoretical deflections with that of the experimental

values.
Comparing the theoretical deflections with that of experimental values by
plotting of graphs, the overall result is that the theoretical one is higher than that
of the experimental one. When undergo same condition of loading, the deflection
of steel is greater theoretically, which is especially greater in case A. When
weight is applied, deflection of Point A is much higher than the other points.
This is because Point A is closer to the fixed support which provides support
strength and undergoes maximum deflection.

6. Comment on the discrepancies, if any, between the experimental and

computer analysis results.
Such discrepancies may due to the length of hanger is not exactly as same as the
set up apparatus. Also, the loading may not as heavy as it claimed. The deflective
strength of steel may be higher as the steel component varies. Last but not least,
the theoretical value should be always set higher than the one of experiment as
extra load is included to prevent the overall system collapse when undergo
exactly the same loading when testing.

Conclusion:
In this experiment, we appreciate the lateral deflection of a steel structural frame. We
find that the deflected shape is dominated by overall-bending. Also, we compare the
theoretical deflections with that of the experimental value. We find that the computer
analysis result may have different between the experimental results.

Page.9