2007

JOHN C. VISNER

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

ANALYTICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF THE LARGE DEFLECTION

OF A CANTILEVER BEAM SUBJECTED TO A CONSTANT, CONCENTRATED

FORCE, WITH A CONSTANT ANGLE, APPLIED AT THE FREE END

A Thesis

Presented to

The Graduate Faculty of The University of Akron

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the

Degree Master of Science

John C. Visner

December, 2007
 ANALYTICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF THE LARGE DEFLECTION

OF A CANTILEVER BEAM SUBJECTED TO A CONSTANT, CONCENTRATED

FORCE, WITH A CONSTANT ANGLE, APPLIED AT THE FREE END

John C. Visner

Thesis

Approved: Accepted:

___________________________
Advisor
Dr. Paul C. K. Lam
___________________________
Co-Advisor
Dr. Daniel C. Deckler
___________________________
Co-Advisor
Dr. Jiang Zhe
___________________________
Department Chair
Dr. Celal Batur
___________________________
Dean of the College
Dr. George K. Haritos
___________________________
Dean of the Graduate School
Dr. George R. Newkome
___________________________
Date

ii
 ABSTRACT

Large deflection of a cantilever beam subjected to a constant force is

modeled. The motivation for this work is derived from an excellent example of

large cantilever beam deflection, the archery limb. With the development of a

program that models the deflection of an archery limb comes the possibility to
improve upon existing designs, which in turn could have large impacts on a rapidly

growing multi-million dollar market. This study investigates a long, slender

cantilever beam of constant cross section with homogeneous and isotropic material
properties. The beam modeled is subjected to a concentrated force applied at the

free end. This force has constant components in two orthogonal directions. For
this model, the weight of the beam is assumed to be negligible. It is also assumed

that the beam is non-extensible and therefore the strains are negligible.

Considering these assumptions, a second order nonlinear differential deflection

curve equation is obtained by means of a static analysis. Because an exact

analytical solution does not exist, a FORTRAN Program using Eulers numerical

method is created to solve this equation. The first of two boundary conditions, the
curvature at the free end, is known to be zero. However, the boundary condition

at the fixed end is unknown. A shooting method is employed within the program

to obtain the correct curvature at the fixed end to yield the deflected beam shape.
Experiments are then performed to verify the numerical results. Comparisons with

published numerical results show excellent agreement, and excellent agreement

is also obtained between the numerical results and experimental data.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

To my advisor and friend,

Daniel C. Deckler, Ph. D, P.E.,

for his motivation and support throughout

my undergraduate and graduate education.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................................... vi

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................ vii

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1
II. BACKGROUND SURVEY ........................................................................... 3

III. THEORETICAL ANALYSIS ........................................................................ 9

3.1 Deflection Curve Equation Development .........................................10

3.2 Analytical Solution .........................................................................15

3.3 Numerical Solution ........................................................................18

3.4 Program Description ......................................................................20

IV. RESULTS ...............................................................................................23

4.1 Theoretical Results ........................................................................23

4.2 Experimental Procedure and Results ...............................................27

V. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................35

5.1 Future Work .................................................................................36

REFERENCES ................................................................................................37

APPENDICES.................................................................................................39

A. FORTRAN PROGRAM CODE ............................................................40

B. FORTRAN PROGRAM OUTPUT OF EXPERIMENT 1 ............................44

C. FORTRAN PROGRAM OUTPUT OF EXPERIMENT 2 ............................51

v
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
4.1 Changes in Tip Deflection for Different Stepsizes, s ............................................ 25

vi
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page
3.1 Cantilever Beam ....................................................................................10

3.2 Beam Free Body Diagram ......................................................................12

3.3 Free Body Diagram of Cut Beam ............................................................13

3.4 Infinitesimally Small Section of Beam .....................................................15

3.5 FORTRAN Program Flowchart .................................................................22

4.1 Comparison of Belendez and FORTRAN Program Theoretical Curves .........25

4.2 FORTRAN Program Results with Varying Force ........................................26

4.3 FORTRAN Program Results with Constant Force of 3.92N ........................26

4.4 FORTRAN Program Results with Constant Force of 5.92N ........................27

4.5 Experimental Beam with 3.92N Applied Vertically Downward ...................29

4.6 Experimental Beam Measurement ..........................................................30

4.7 Comparison of FORTRAN Program Curve and Experimental Curve ............31

4.8 Experimental Beam with 3.92N Applied at Angle of 53 degrees ................33

4.9 FORTRAN Program Theoretical Curves vs. Experimental Curves ...............34

vii
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

While beams receive very little recognition, they play a very important role in

our everyday life. From bridges to cranes, decks to any roofed structure, beams

are everywhere and we most likely use them every day and never realize it. Many
types of beams exist today, however this study examined only one type, the

cantilever beam.

By definition, a cantilever beam is a beam that is fixed at one end, while the

other end is suspended and unsupported, much like a diving board. The inspiration

for this study was derived from perhaps one of the best examples of a cantilever
beam, an archery limb. Made from highly elastic material and capable of projecting

an arrow at extremely high speeds, archery limbs represent an excellent example

of a cantilever beam made of linear elastic material that is capable of sustaining

large deflections.

The traditional long bow, which is a curved stick with a string attached to

each end that is drawn and released while the bow is oriented vertically, has served
archers of many types for thousands of years. However, increasing popularity in

archery hunting and competitive target archery has presented a need for increased

performance in archery equipment. This need prompted the invention of the

compound bow, which uses a cam pinned to the end of the limb along with a series

of cables to provide a mechanical advantage allowing the bow to store more

energy while requiring less force from the archer to draw the bow. The result is
higher potential energy with less work.

1
 Today, the archery industry has blossomed into a multi-million dollar industry
with dozens of manufacturers all competing to design and manufacture the fastest,

lightest, quietest and most cost-competitive compound bow. Todays archery

manufacturers are utilizing the best available technology to date to remain

competitive and increase their products performance. Because the majority of the

performance of a compound bow lies in the limb/cam combination, a model that

describes the relationship between the limb deflection and the action of the cam
could provide insight into the inner workings of this system as well as reveal areas

within the system that could be improved upon. While the relationship between

the limb and cam is one of extreme complexity due to several unknown variables,
the development of such a model could take compound bow performance to the

next level and revolutionize the archery industry.

This study takes the first step to design the aforementioned model by

addressing large deflections of cantilever beams of linear elastic material subjected

to a constant force applied at a constant angle to the free end. The goal of this

study is two-fold: to develop a program that will solve a second order, non-linear

differential equation governing the behavior of a deflected beam and then perform
a series of experiments that will verify the results of the program to build

confidence in the programs accuracy.

2
 CHAPTER II
BACKGROUND SURVEY

Deflection of cantilever beams has been the subject of numerous analyses to

date. An excellent example of a cantilever beam subjected to a vertical

concentrated force at the free end can be found in Mechanics of Materials [1], as
well as many other textbooks on physics and mechanics. In this case, the small

angle assumption is valid and an equation that describes the deflection of the free

end, showing proportionality between the deflection and the externally applied
force that is applied, can be found [1]. However, in the aforementioned textbook,

the discussion only addresses beams subjected to small deflections. When

deflections are large and the small angle assumption is no longer valid, the
problem becomes increasingly difficult and an analytical solution does not exist

due to the presence of a non-linear term in the deflection equation.

For the case of large deflection, several different solutions have been found

for cantilever beams subjected to external forces. Analyses of beams undergoing

large-amplitude free vibration have been studied in the past utilizing many
conventional and mixed finite element methods. Woinowsky-Krieger [2] used a

single-term approximation to the ordinary nonlinear differential equation to obtain

a solution in terms of elliptic integrals. Srinivasan [3] applied the Ritz-Galerkin

technique, choosing a single-term approximation to obtain the nonlinear free

vibration responses of simply supported beams and plates. A similar analysis,

beams subject to non-linear vibrations, has also been studied. Ray and Bert [4]
presented analytical and experimental values of natural frequencies as a

3
function of the ratio of maximum amplitude to beam thickness and initial tension
of an oscillation beam. Because this investigation will focus on a force applied

slowly to the free end thus producing a static analysis, dynamic analysis of the

beam will not be considered.

Lee et al. [5] investigated large deflection of a linear elastic cantilever beam

of variable cross-section under combined loading by means of the Runge-Kutta-

Falsi method. Baker [6] obtained large deflection profiles of linear elastic tapered
cantilever beams under arbitrary distributed loads by means of a weighted residual

solution of the Bernoulli-Euler bending moment equation. Dado and AL-Sadder [7]

presented a new technique for large deflection analysis of non-prismatic cantilever

beams based on the integrated least square error of the nonlinear governing

differential equation in which the angle of rotation is represented by a polynomial.

Shatnawi and AL-Sadder [8] studied exact large deflection of non-prismatic,

nonlinear bimodulus cantilever beams subjected to a tip moment by applying a

power series approach to analytically solve highly nonlinear simultaneous first-

order differential equations. Shvartsman [9] examined large deflections of a

cantilever beam subjected to a follower force by reducing a nonlinear two-point

boundary-value problem to an initial-value problem by change of variables, then

solving without iterations. AL-Sadder and AL-Rawi [10] developed quasi-

linearization finite differences for large deflection analysis of non-prismatic slender

cantilever beams subjected to various types of continuous and discontinuous

external variable distributed and concentrated loads in horizontal and vertical

global directions. Ibrahimbegovic [11] studied large displacement of beams by

implementing finite element analysis to three-dimensional finite-strain Reissner

beam theory, where beam element reference

4
axes are represented by arbitrary space-curved lines. These papers offer
similarities to this study, however are not directly applicable because they consider

cantilevers of varying cross-section.

Cantilever beams of non-linear materials have also been studied. Lewis and

Monasa [12] numerically studied large deflections of cantilever beams made of

non-linear materials subjected to one vertical concentrated load at the free end
using a fourth order Runge-Kutta method. K. Lee [13] examined large deflection

of cantilever beams of non-linear elastic material under the effects of combined

loading by using Butchers fifth order Runge-Kutta method. Baykara et al. [14]
obtained numerical results to large deflections of a cantilever beam of nonlinear

bimodulus material subjected to an end moment, showing that bimodulus behavior

has a significant effect for the case of large deflection. Rezazadeh [15] developed
a comprehensive model to study nonlinear behavior of multilayered micro beam

switches for the application of micro-electromechanical mechanical systems

(MEMS), in which the derived nonlinear equation was numerically solved using the
nonlinear finite difference method. Antman [16] studied large lateral buckling of

nonlinearly elastic beams subjected to flexure, torsion, extension or shear. This

configuration is described by a position vector function and an orthonormal pair of

vector functions of a real variable which is interpreted as a scaled arc length

parameter of the straight line of centroids of a beam in its natural reference

configuration. C. Cesnik et al. [17] presented a refined theory of composite beams.

The basis for the theory is the variational-asymptotical method, a mathematical

technique by which the three-dimensional analysis of composite beam deformation

can be split into a

5
linear, two-dimensional, cross-sectional analysis and a nonlinear, one-dimensional
beam analysis.

Large deflection of cantilever beams that are prismatic and made of linear
elastic material have been the subject of numerous studies in which the beam is

subjected to a uniformly distributed load. Seames and Conway [18] presented a

numerical method for calculating large deflections of cantilever beams under

uniform loading. This numerical method assumed that the elastic axis of the beam

could be approximated by a number of circular arcs tangent to one another at their

points of intersection, using the Bernoulli-Euler equation to determine the radius

of each circular arc. Rhode [19] obtained an approximate solution for the large

deflection of a cantilever beam subject to a uniformly distributed load by expanding

the slope in a power series of the arc length. Lee et al. [20] analyzed stresses and
displacements experimentally in largely deflected cantilever beams subjected to

uniformly distributed loads by means of photoelasticity. This analysis

demonstrated that for the case of a beam material having a small modulus of
elasticity value with gravity acting alone as a uniform load that large deflections

would occur. Belendez et al. [21] analyzed large deflections of a uniform cantilever

beam under the action of a combined load consisting of a uniformly distributed

load and an external vertical concentrated load applied at the free end. This

analysis obtained a numerical solution using an algorithm based on the Runge-

Kutta-Felhberg method and compared the numerical results with experimental

results. In reference [22], Belendez et al. experimentally and numerically

investigated deflections of a cantilever beam subjected to combined loading.

Further literature review reveals that, while the work of Belendez et al. [21], [22]
offer many similarities to that of this study,

6
earlier work performed by Belendez et al. provides a more relative model to follow
and is described in detail below.

Frisch-Fay [23] solved for the large deflection of a cantilever beam under two
concentrated loads in terms of elliptic integrals. Barten [24] and Bisshopp and

Drucker [25] solved for the large deflection of a cantilever beam subjected to one

concentrated load, acting vertically downward at the free end of the beam, also in
terms of elliptic integrals. The work of [23], [24] and [25] are all based on the

fundamental Bernoulli-Euler theorem which states that the curvature is

proportional to the bending moment.

In this study, large deflection of a cantilever beam subjected to a constant,

concentrated load applied at the free end will be analyzed, and the work of
Belendez et al. [26] will be closely followed. Belendez et al. attempts to find an

exact analytical solution, however upon discovering that one does not exist,

proceeds to apply a mixed numerical and analytical approach along with the
program Mathematica to solve for the deflected beam shapes. This study will also

attempt to find an exact analytical solution, and then will utilize Eulers numerical

method along with the employment of a shooting method in the program

FORTRAN to find the deflected beam shape.

What sets this work apart from work performed by the aforementioned

references is that this analysis will incorporate a constant, concentrated force

applied to the free end at a constant angle, thus not limiting the analysis to only

a vertical downward concentrated end force. An analytical approach to solving the

problem will be attempted. However, due to the presence of a non-linear term, an

exact analytical solution does not exist. A FORTRAN Program using Eulers

numerical method will be created to solve for the shape of the deflected

7
beam, and a series of experiments will be performed to reproduce the FORTRAN
Program results.

8
 CHAPTER III
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

A long, slender prismatic cantilever beam of rectangular cross section made

of linear elastic material is modeled. Figure 3.1 shows a cantilever beam of length
L with a concentrated force F applied at the free end. In this figure, x and y are

the horizontal and vertical displacements at the free end, respectively, and 0

represents the maximum slope of the beam. The constant angle at which the force
is applied is represented by , and is measured positive downward from the
horizontal axis. The origin of the Cartesian coordinate system shall be at the fixed
end of the beam and (x,y) will represent the coordinates of point A. The arc length
of the beam, s, shall be measured between the fixed end and point A.
For this study, it will be assumed that axial strains are negligible because any

change in length will be assumed to be a small fraction of the original length. This

will imply that the beam is inextensible. It will also be assumed that the cross

section of the beam remains constant across the length of the beam, meaning that

the effect of Poissons Ratio, or the ratio of axial elongation to lateral contraction,

can be neglected [27]. Next, it is assumed that the Bernoulli-Euler theorem is valid,

which states that the curvature of the beam is proportional to the bending

moment. Lastly, it is assumed that the deflection due to the weight of the beam is

negligible.

9
 L

x L-x

L - x - x x

X
A(x,y)
s

F
Y

Figure 3.1 Cantilever Beam

3.1 Deflection Curve Equation Development

The analysis begins with a free body diagram, shown in Figure 3.2 that
describes the forces acting on the deflected beam. At the fixed end of the beam,
labeled as O, Mo is the reaction moment and Rx and Ry are the reaction forces
acting on the fixed end of the beam in the x and y directions, respectively. The
force F is resolved into a horizontal component, noted as Fx, and a vertical

component, noted as Fy. Summing forces in the x and y direction yields the
following equations

10
 Fx =0 (3.1)

Rx = F cos (3.2)

Fy =0 (3.3)

Ry = F sin . (3.4)

Taking a counterclockwise moment as positive and summing moments about point

O, the moment acting at the fixed end of the beam becomes

MO =0 (3.5)

M o = F(sin )(L x ) + F(cos )( y ) . (3.6)

The Bernoulli-Euler bending moment-curvature equation for a uniform cross

section rectangular beam of linear elastic material is

d
EI = M (x, y) . (3.7)
ds

Where M(x,y) is the bending moment as a function of the distances x and y,

represents the curvature at any point along the length of the beam, E is the
modulus of elasticity and I is the moment of inertia of the beam cross section
about the neutral axis. It is necessary to find M as a function of x and y to

11
obtain the moment at any point along the length of the beam. This can be done

by cutting the beam at an arbitrary point and summing moments about the cut.

L - x

Rx

M
o
y
Ry

X
Fcos

Y
Fsin

Figure 3.2 Beam Free Body Diagram

Figure 3.3 shows the cut beam with the reactions and moments acting on it. The
arc length of the beam, which is measured between the fixed end (O) and point
A, is represented by s. At point A, M(x,y) is the moment M as a function of the
distances x and y while v represents the shear force. At the fixed end of the beam,

Mo=F(sin)(L-x)+F(cos)(y) is the reaction moment, and Rx=F(cos) and

Ry=F(sin) are the reaction forces in the x and y directions, respectively. Summing

moments about A to obtain the moment M as a function of x and y yields

MA =0 (3.8)

12
 M (x, y) = F(sin )(L x ) + F(cos )( y ) F(sin )(x) F(cos )(y) = 0 (3.9)

M (x, y) = F(sin )(L x x) + F(cos )( y y) . (3.10)

Rx

Mo
s
Ry y

X
v
A
Y
M(x,y)

Figure 3.3 Free Body Diagram of Cut Beam

Equation (3.10) provides a useful expression for the moment M as a function of x

and y which can be substituted into Equation (3.7), to yield

d
EI = F (sin )(L x x) + F (cos )( y y) . (3.11)
ds

Taking the derivative of Equation (3.11) with respect to s

d d d
EI = [F (sin )(L x x) + F (cos )( y y) ] (3.12)
ds ds ds

d d d d
EI = [F (sin )(L x x)]+
ds
[
F(cos )( y y) . ] (3.13)
ds ds ds

13
Noting that L, x and y are constants, yields the following

d 2 dx dy
EI = (F sin ) (F cos ) . (3.14)
ds 2 ds ds

The right side of Equation (3.14) is written in terms of x and y while the left side

is written in terms of . Now a relationship between x, y and must be found.

Figure 3.4 shows an infinitesimally small section of the cantilever beam, of

which the arc length can be approximated as a straight line. Using

trigonometry, the following relationships can be established

dx
cos = (3.15)
ds

sin = dy . (3.16)
ds

Substituting Equations (3.15) and (3.16) into Equation (3.14) yields

d 2
EI = F (sin )(cos ) F (cos )(sin ) . (3.17)
ds 2

Equation (3.17) is the non-linear differential equation describing the deflection

curve of a cantilever beam made of linear elastic material subjected to a

concentrated end load as shown in Figure 3.1. An attempt will be made to find an

exact analytical solution to Equation (3.17), however, should an exact analytical

solution not exist, a numerical solution will be developed.

14
 ds
dy

dx

Figure 3.4 Infinitesimally Small Section of Beam

3.2 Analytical Solution

Now that the non-linear differential equation describing the deflection curve
of a cantilever beam made of linear elastic material subjected to a concentrated
end load has been found, it must be solved in order to obtain an expression for
both the x and y coordinates along the length of the deflected beam.

To obtain an analytical solution to Equation (3.17), both sides will be

multiplied by d/ds to obtain

d d 2 d d
EI + F (sin )(cos ) + F (cos )(sin ) =0. (3.18)
ds ds 2 ds ds

Rewriting each term of Equation (3.18) as a derivative with respect to the arc

length yields the following

d d 2 d 1 d 2
EI = EI (3.19)
ds ds 2 ds 2 ds

15
 d d (3.20)
F (sin )(cos) ds = ds [F (sin )(sin)]

d d (3.21)
F (cos )(sin) ds = ds [ F (cos )(cos)].

Substituting Equations (3.19), (3.20) and (3.21) into Equation (3.18) yields

2
d 1 d
EI + F (sin )(sin) F (cos )(cos) = 0. (3.22)
ds 2 ds

Equation (3.22) is immediately integrable taking into account that at the free

end, the following boundary condition is valid

(L) = 0 (3.23)

where 0is the unknown, maximum slope at the free end of the beam. Integrating

Equation (3.22) yields

1 d
EI
2
+ F (sin )(sin) F (cos )(cos) + C = 0 (3.24)
2 ds

and rearranging yields

1 d 2
C= EI F (sin )(sin) + F (cos )(cos) . (3.25)

2 ds

16
Applying the following boundary conditions
d
=0@s=L (3.26)
ds

= 0 @ s = L (3.27)

to Equation (3.25) yields the constant of integration (C)

C = F (sin )(sin 0 ) + F (cos )(cos 0 ) . (3.28)

Substituting Equation (3.28) into Equation (3.24) and rearranging yields:

d 2F [(sin )(sin sin) (cos )(cos cos)].

2
= 0 0 (3.29)
ds EI

Taking the square root of both sides of Equation (3.29)

d = 2F (sin )(sin0 sin) (cos )(cos0 cos) (3.30)

ds EI

and separating variables yields

EI d
(3.31)
.
ds = 2F (sin )(sin0 sin) (cos )(cos0 cos)
17
Solving for ds from Equation (3.15) and substituting the result into Equation (3.31)

yields
EI (cos)d
.
dx = 2F (sin )(sin0 sin) (cos )(cos0 cos) (3.32)

Likewise solving for dy from Equation (3.16) and substituting the result into

Equation (3.31) yields

EI (sin)d
.
dy = 2F (sin )(sin0 sin) (cos )(cos0 cos) (3.33)

Ideally, Equations (3.32) and (3.33) would be integrable, thus yielding

equations that would describe the horizontal and vertical deflections at any point

along the neutral axis of the cantilever beam. Unfortunately, there is not an exact

analytical solution to the integrals on the left side of equations (3.32) and (3.33).

This necessitates finding a numerical solution to Equation (3.17) to find the

deflected shape of the beam.

3.3 Numerical Solution

Using Eulers method, the second order non-linear differential Equation (3.17)

can be reduced into two first order non-linear differential equations. The curvature

of the beam, denoted as , can be written as

d
=. (3.34)
ds
Taking the derivative of both sides with respect to s yields

18
 d 2
= d . (3.35)
2
ds ds

Substituting Equation (3.35) into Equation (3.17) yields

d (3.36)
EI ds = F (sin )(cos) F(cos )(sin)

and rearranging

d F F (3.37)
ds = EI (sin )(cos) EI (cos )(sin) .

Numerically integrating Equation (3.34) using Eulers method

d s
n +1 = n + (3.38)
ds n

n+1 = n + s n . (3.39)

Numerically integrating Equation (3.37) using Eulers method

d
n+1 = n + s
ds n

F F
= + s (sin )(cos ) (cos )(sin ).

n+1 n EI n EI n
(3.40)

(3.41)
Equations (3.39) and (3.41) represent two first order differential equations that

can be used to numerically solve Equation (3.17). This will be done by creating a

FORTRAN Program as explained in Section 3.4.

3.4 Program Description

To solve Equations (3.39) and (3.41), the values of and must be known.

While the angle at the fixed end is known to be zero, the curvature at the fixed

end is not known. Since the curvature at the free end is known to be zero, a

shooting method will be employed to find the appropriate initial curvature at the
fixed end of the beam. The correct initial curvature is one that will produce zero

curvature at the free end of the beam and, as a result, an accurate deflected beam

shape.

Once the initial parameters are input, the program is executed and Eulers
numerical method is used to calculate the slope and the curvature across the

length of the beam. The program is particularly interested with the curvature at

the two end points of the beam the fixed end and the free end. The curvature
at the fixed end of the beam begins with some unknown value of kappa that

gradually decreases across the length of the deflected beam until it reaches zero

at the free end of the beam. Since the curvature at the fixed end is unknown, it
must be determined in order to produce a curvature of zero at the free end of the

beam, therefore providing an accurate deflected beam shape. The FORTRAN

Program Flowchart can be found in Figure 3.5.

Calculating the correct initial curvature is accomplished within the program

by using the bisection method. The unknown curvature at the fixed end is assumed

to fall between a specified initial curvature range that the user guesses;

20
the low value of this range being KLOW and the high value being KHIGH. The
program then uses KLOW and Eulers numerical method to calculate the curvature

at the free end of the beam, KLOWEND. Next, the program determines the average

of KLOW and KHIGH to calculate the mid-range value of the curvature, KMID. If
the difference of KLOW and KHIGH falls within the specified tolerance, then KMID

is used to calculate the final deflected beam shape and the program ends.

However, if the difference of KLOW and KHIGH does not meet the required
accuracy, the program then uses KMID and Eulers numerical method to calculate

the curvature at the free end of the beam, KMIDEND. The program then compares

the values of KLOWEND and KMIDEND to determine if a curvature of zero exists

between these two values. If so, KMID becomes the new value of KHIGH and the

value of KLOW remains the same. If a curvature of zero does not exist between

the range of KLOWEND and KMIDEND, then a curvature of zero exists between
KMID and KHIGH so KMID becomes the new value of KLOW and the value of

KHIGH remains the same.

At this point, the half of the range that contains a curvature of zero is kept
and the other half of the range is discarded, and the bisection method is again

employed to find a new value of KMID within the reduced range and the process

repeats itself. The initial curvature range is continually narrowed using this process
until the difference of KLOW and KHIGH reaches the desired accuracy at which

point KMID becomes the unknown initial curvature and is used to calculate the
final deflected beam shape. The FORTRAN Program Code can be found in

Appendix A.

It is important to note a few limitations of the FORTRAN Program. First, the

program is limited to constant angles applied to the free end for angles

21
greater than zero and less than or equal to ninety degrees, measured from the

horizontal. Also, the program can only compute deflections of beams with constant

cross sections. Lastly, if the force applied to the end becomes too large for a given

beam geometry and material to support, the result will be an unusual and

unrealistic deflected beam shape.

Enter Inputs & Initial

Conditions

Calculate KLOWEND from

input value of KLOW

Calculate KMID

Is KMID within specified

YES
tolerance?

NO

Calculate KMIDEND using

KMID from above
Use = KMID and ,s = 0 as initial
conditions to find , , X & Y over
the length of the beam

KLOWEND x KMIDEND < 0 ? NO KMID = KLOW

Stop

YES KMID = KHIGH

Figure 3.5 FORTRAN Program Flowchart

22
 CHAPTER IV
RESULTS

4.1 Theoretical Results

The FORTRAN Program previously described will now be used to produce

several deflected beam curves. The first theoretical beam curve developed by the
FORTRAN Program will be compared to both the Belendez [26] theoretical and
Belendez experimental beam curves presented in said research paper in an
attempt to reproduce their results. In this example, a force of 3.92N is applied
vertically downward at the end of the beam. The beam exhibits a length of 30cm,
a width of 3.04cm and a height of 0.078cm. The beam is made of low-carbon steel

consisting of exhibiting a modulus of elasticity of 2.0x1011 Pa and an area moment

of inertia of 1.2022x10-12 m4 [26].

Figure 4.1 displays the Belendez experimental and Belendez theoretical

curves, along with the theoretical curve obtained from the FORTRAN Program. The
FORTRAN Program theoretical curve compares well with the Belendez
experimental curve, exhibiting a maximum Y direction error of 3.84%. The

FORTRAN Program theoretical curve compares very well to the Belendez

theoretical curve having a maximum Y direction error of 1.35%. To establish a

means of comparison, the Belendez experimental curve when compared to the

Belendez theoretical curve yields a maximum Y direction error of 4.19%.

Figure 4.2 shows five deflection curves calculated by the FORTRAN Program.

These curves show how the deflection of the beam changes as the angle is held

constant and the force is increased. In this example, the force is

23
applied to the end of the beam vertically downward, or 90 degrees to the
horizontal, and the force is increased from 3.92N to 7.92N in 1.0N increments. As

expected, the beam deflection increases as the force is increased.

Figure 4.3 shows six deflection curves calculated by the FORTRAN Program.

These curves show how the deflection of the beam changes as the force is held

constant and the angle is varied. In this example, a force of 3.92N is applied to
the free end and the angle is gradually decreased from 90 degrees to 15 degrees

in 15 degree increments.

Figure 4.4 also shows six deflection curves calculated by the FORTRAN

Program and shows how the deflection curve changes as the force is held constant

and the angle is varied. In this example, a force of 3.92N is applied to the free end
and the angle is gradually decreased from 90 degrees to 15 degrees in 15 degree

increments.

Figures 4.3 and 4.4 both display similar phenomena in that as the angle of

the force decreases from 90 degrees, the beam deflection increases, but only to a
point at which the deflection reaches a maximum and then begins to decrease as
the angle of the applied force reaches 15 degrees. This can be explained by the
fact that at 90 degrees, the force is acting only in the y direction and not in the x

direction. As the applied angle is decreased from 90 degrees, the y component of

the force begins to decrease and the x component begins to increase. This occurs

until some combination of the x and y force components and deflected geometry

produce a maximum deflection.

To ensure accuracy and convergence of the FORTRAN Program, stepsizes of

the arc length s were varied from 1(10-2) to 1(10-6). From the results shown in

table 4.1, only a .0051% difference in tip deflection occurs when the arc

24
length stepsize is changed from 1(10-5) to 1(10-6). The percent error is as

calculated using the tip deflection for a 1(10-6) stepsize the true value. The and

result using a stepsize 1(10-3) is shown in Appendices B C.

Table 4.1 Changes in Tip Deflection for Different Stepsizes, s

s Y % Error

1(10-2) 0.1424643 4.6481%

1(10-3) 0.1367674 0.4634%
-4
1(10 ) 0.1360728 0.0469%
1(10-5) 0.1361296 0.0051%
-6
1(10 ) 0.1361366 0.0000%

Belendez vs. FORTRAN, F = 3.92N & = 90o

x (m)
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06
y (m)

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14
Belendez Experimental Curve

Belendez Theoretical Curve

FORTRAN Program Curve

Figure 4.1 Comparison of Belendez and FORTRAN Program Theoretical Curves

25
 FORTRAN Program Results at = 90o and Varying F

x (m)
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
0.00

0.05 F = 3.92N

F = 4.92N

F = 5.92N
y (m)

0.10
F = 6.92N

F = 7.92N
0.15

0.20

Figure 4.2 FORTRAN Program Results with Varying Force (F=F)

FORTRAN Program Results at F = 3.92N and Varying a

x (m)
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
0.00

a = 90

0.05 a = 75

a = 60
y (m)

a = 45

0.10 a = 30

a = 15

0.15

Figure 4.3 FORTRAN Program Results with Constant Force of 3.92N (a=a)
26
 FORTRAN Program Results at F = 5.92N and Varying

x (m)
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
0.00

a=90
0.05
a=75
a=60
a=45
y (m)

0.10 a=30
a=15

0.15

0.20

Figure 4.4 FORTRAN Program Results with Constant Force of 5.92N (a=a)

4.2 Experimental Procedure and Results

It has been shown in Section 4.1 that the FORTRAN Program is capable of
producing an accurate beam deflection curve when compared to the Belendez

theoretical and Belendez experimental curves as shown in Figure 4.1. To further

validate the FORTRAN Program, two experiments will be performed. The first
experiment will reproduce the Belendez experimental curve and then compare the

results to the theoretical curve produced by the FORTRAN Program. The second

experiment will mirror the first experiment; however instead of applying the force
vertically downward, the force will be applied at an angle.

In the first experiment, the beam is fastened to the top of a bench by means

of a clamp. The beam exhibits a length of 30cm, a width of 3.04cm and

27
a height of 0.078cm. The beam is made of low-carbon steel consisting of modulus

of elasticity of 2.0x1011 pa and 1.2022x10-12 m4. Lightweight dental floss is used

to hang the weight from the end of the beam. A force of 3.92N is applied vertically
downward at the end of the beam as shown in Figure 4.5. Once the beam was
deflected, measurements were taken along the length of the beam using a digital
caliper to capture the x and y coordinates as shown in Figure 4.6.

The x and y coordinates were then plotted to obtain the experimental curve

of which a force of 3.92N is applied vertically downward at the end of the beam.

Figure 4.7 shows the experimental results as compared to the results obtained

from the FORTRAN Program. It can be seen that the experimental curve compares

well to the FORTRAN Program theoretical curve very well exhibiting a maximum

relative error of 2.18%. The FORTRAN Program output of the first experiment can

be found in Appendix B.

28
Figure 4.5 Experimental Beam with 3.92N Applied Vertically Downward

29
Figure 4.6 Experimental Beam Measurement

30
 FORTRAN Program Curve vs. Experimental Curve, F = 3.92N & = 90o

x (m)

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06
y (m)

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

FORTRAN Program Curve

Experimental Curve

Figure 4.7 Comparison of FORTRAN Program Curve and Experimental Curve

In the second experiment, a force of 3.92N is applied to the end of the beam

at a downward angle of 53o measured from horizontal as shown in Figure 4.8. The

beam exhibits a length of 30cm, a width of 3.04cm and a height of 0.078cm. The

beam is made of low-carbon steel consisting of modulus of elasticity of 2.0x10 11

pa and 1.2022x10-12 m4. The beam is fastened to the top of a bench by means of

a clamp. Lightweight dental floss was used to hang the weight from the end of the
beam. In order to apply the force at the proper angle, a steel hook was used to
redirect the dental floss to prevent the weight from hanging vertically downward,

thus simulating a force applied at 53o. The smoothly polished surface of the steel

hook, coupled with the addition of

31
lubricating oil to the string, allowed for smooth sliding of the string against the
hook and thus a frictionless surface was assumed.

Once the beam was deflected, measurements were taken along the length of
the beam using a digital caliper to capture the x and y coordinates as shown in

Figure 4.6.
The x and y coordinates were then plotted to obtain the experimental curve
which exhibits a force of 3.92N applied to the end of the beam at a downward

angle of 53o measured from horizontal. Figure 4.9 shows the FORTRAN Program

curve with a force of 3.92N applied vertically downward compared to the

experimental curve with a force of 3.92N applied vertically downward, and the
FORTRAN Program curve with a force of 3.92N applied at a downward angle of

53o measured from horizontal compared to the experimental curve with a force of

3.92N applied at a downward angle of 53o measured from horizontal. It can be

seen that both the FORTRAN Program curve and the experimental curve with a
force of 3.92N applied vertically downward compare very well exhibiting a
maximum Y direction error of 2.18%. The FORTRAN Program curve and the

experimental curve with a force of 3.92N applied at a downward angle of 53 o

measured from horizontal also compare very well displaying a maximum Y

direction error of 2.34%. The FORTRAN Program output of the second experiment
can be found in Appendix C.

32
Figure 4.8 Experimental Beam with 3.92N Applied at Angle of 53 degrees

33
 FORTRAN Program Theoretical Curves vs. Experimental Results

x (m)
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06
y (m)

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16
Experimental Curve with F=3.92N at 90 Deg.
Experimental Curve with F=3.92N at 53 Deg.
FORTRAN Program Curve with F=3.92N at 90 Deg.
FORTRAN Program Curve with F=3.92N at 53 Deg.

Figure 4.9 FORTRAN Program Theoretical Curves vs. Experimental Curves

34
 CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION

Analytical and experimental analysis of the large deflection of a cantilever

beam subjected to a constant, concentrated force, with a constant angle, applied

at the free end has been studied. An attempt to find an exact analytic expression
for both the x and y coordinates along the length of the deflected beam was made,

however the expressions for dx and dy could not be integrated. A numerical

analysis using Eulers Numerical Method was successfully performed and a

FORTRAN Program was written that will perform Eulers Numerical Method to find
the x and y coordinates along the length of the deflected beam for a given

combination of beam geometry, material and force. Theoretical results compare

well with data published by Belendez [26], exhibiting a maximum Y direction error

of 1.35%.

Two experiments were performed to reproduce the FORTRAN Program

theoretical results in an attempt to give the reader confidence in the accuracy of
the FORTRAN Program. The first experiment applied a force of 3.92N vertically
downward from the end of the beam. The results of the first experiment compared
well with the FORTRAN Program results under the same conditions exhibiting a
maximum Y direction error of 2.18%. The second experiment applied a force of

3.92N at an angle of 53o measured from the horizontal. The results of the second

experiment compared well with the FORTRAN Program results under the same
conditions exhibiting a maximum Y direction error of 2.34%. The second
experiment not only yielded good results when compared to

35
the FORTRAN Program results under the same conditions, but also provided

confidence as to the repeatability of the experimental setup.

5.1 Future Work

In the future, several areas of the study could be expanded upon to give the
program more versatility. First, the program could be expanded to handle beams
of non-constant cross section. This could be done by adding the variable I(s) to the
deflection curve equation in place of the constant I. Next, the program could be

adjusted to incorporate a beam made of non-linear material. This would remove

the variable E and replace it with the variable E(s) and an expression describing

the varying material properties across the length of the beam would need to be
found. A force of non-constant magnitude could also be added to the program.
This would remove the constant F and replace it with either F(x,y) or F(s),

depending on where the force was applied to the beam. The angle at which the
force is applied could also change throughout the deflection of the beam. This
would require the variable (x,y) to be added to the deflection curve equation in

place of the constant . The mass of the beam could also be included in the

deflection curve equation, removing the assumption that the beam is mass-less.
Lastly, the program could be expanded to model an extensible beam, where the
arc length s would not be equal to the length of the beam L. Expanding the

deflection curve equation to capture some or all of the aforementioned scenarios

would give the program more versatility and greatly expand the programs ability
to study more complex beams, as well as increase the programs accuracy.

36
 REFERENCES
[1] J. M. Gere, Mechanics of Materials, Sixth Ed., Brooks/Cole-Thomson Learning
(2004).
[2] S. Woinowski-Krieger, The effect of the axial force on the vibrations of hinged
bars, J. Appl. Mech. 17, pp. 35-36 (1950).
[3] A. V. Srinivasan, Large amplitude-free oscillations of beams and plates, AIAA
J., 3(10), pp. 167-168 (1965).
[4] J. D. Ray and C. W. Bert, Nonlinear vibrations of a beam with fixed ends,
Trans. ASME, J. Engng. Ind., 91, pp. 997-1004 (1969).

[5] B. K. Lee, J. F. Wilson and S. J. Oh, Elastica of cantilevered beams with

variable cross sections, Int. J. Non-Linear Mech., 28, pp. 579-589 (1993).
[6] G. Baker, On the large deflections of non-prismatic cantilevers with a finite
depth, Comp. Struct., 46, pp. 365-370 (1993).
[7] M. Dado and S. AL-Sadder, A new technique for large deflection analysis of
non-prismatic cantilever beams, Mech. Res. Comm. 32, 692-703 (2005).
[8] A. Shatnawi and S. AL-Sadder, Exact large deflection analysis of non-prismatic
cantilever beams of nonlinear bimodulus material subjected to a tip moment,
J. Rein. Plas. And Comp., Vol. 26, No. 12 (2007).
[9] B. Shvartsman, Large deflections of a cantilever beam subjected to a follower
force, J. Sound and Vib. 304, pp. 969-973 (2007).
[10] S. AL-Sadder and R. AL-Rawi, Finite difference scheme for large deflection
analysis of non-prismatic cantilever beams subjected to different types of
continuous and discontinuous loadings, Arch. Appl. Mech. 75, pp. 459-473
(2006).
[11] A. Ibrahimbegovic. On finite element implementation of geometrically
nonlinear Reissners beam theory: three-dimensional curved beam elements,
Comp. Meth. In Appl. Mech. and Eng. 122, pp. 11-26 (1995).
[12] G. Lewis and F. Monasa, Large deflections of cantilever beams of non-linear
materials, Comp. Struct., 14, pp. 357-360 (1981).
[13] K. Lee, Large deflections of cantilever beams of non-linear elastic material
under a combined loading, Int. J. Non-Linear Mech., 37, pp. 439-443 (2002).

37
[14]C. Baykara, U. Guven and I. Bayer, Large deflections of a cantilever beam of
nonlinear bimodulus material subjected to an end moment, J. Rein. Plas. And
Comp., Vol. 24, No. 12 (2005).
[15] G. Rezazadeh, A comprehensive model to study nonlinear behavior of
multilayered micro beam switches 14, Micro. Tech., pp. 135-141 (2007).
[16]S. Antman, Large lateral buckling of nonlinearly elastic beams, Arch. Rat.
Mech. and Anal., Vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 293-305 (1984).
[17]C. Cesnik, V. Sutyrin and D. Hodges, Refined theory of composite beams: the
role of short-wavelength extrapolation, Int. J. Solids Struct., Vol. 33, pp.
1387-1408 (1996).
[18]A. E. Seames and H. D. Conway, A numerical procedure for calculating the
large deflections of straight and curved beams, J. Appl. Mech., 24, pp. 289-
294 (1957).
[19] F. V. Rhode, Large deflections of cantilever beams with uniformly distributed
load, Q. Appl. Math., 11, pp. 337-338 (1953).
[20] H. Lee, A. J. Durelli and V. J. Parks, Stress in largely deflected cantilever
beams subjected to gravity, J. Appl. Mech., 26, pp. 323-325 (1969).
[21] T. Belendez, M. Perez-Polo, C. Neipp and A. Belendez, Numerical and
Experimental Analysis of Large Deflections of Cantilever Beams Under a
Combined Load, Phys. Scr., Vol. T118, pp. 61-65 (2005).
[22] T. Belendez, C. Neipp and A. Belendez, Numerical and Experimental Analysis
of a Cantilever Beam: A Laboratory Project to Introduce Geometric
Nonlinearity in Mechanics of Materials, Int. J. Engng. Ed., Vol. 19, p. 885
(2003).
[23] R. Frisch-Fay, Large deflections of a cantilever beam under two concentrated
loads, J. Appl. Mech., 29, pp. 200-201 (1962).
[24] H. J. Barten, On the deflection of a cantilever beam, Q. Appl. Math., 2, 168-
171 (1944); 3, pp. 275-276 (1945).
[25] K. E. Bisshopp and D. C. Drucker, Large deflections of cantilever beams, Q.
Appl. Math., 3, pp. 272-275 (1945).
[26] T. Belendez, C. Neipp and A. Belendez, Large and small deflections of a
cantilever beam, Eur. J. Phys., 23, pp. 371-379 (2002).
[27] R. Feynman, R. B. Leighton and M. Sands, The Feynman Lectures on Physics:
Mainly Electromagnetism and matter, Vol. 2, Addison Wesley, Ch.
38 (1989).

38
APPENDICES

39
 APPENDIX A
FORTRAN PROGRAM CODE

C **************************************************
C * *
C * THIS PROGRAM CALCULATES THE LARGE *
C * DEFLECTION OF A CANTILEVER BEAM *
C * *
C * INPUT VARIABLES AND INITIAL CONDITIONS: *
C * *
C * FORCE ACTING ON FREE END OF BEAM = FORCE *
C * ANGLE AT WHICH FORCE IS APPLIED = ALPHA *
C * BEAM MOMENT OF INERTIA = I *
C * BEAM MODULUS OF ELASTICITY = E *
C * BEAM LENGTH = L *
C * ARC LENGTH TO BE USED AS STEPSIZE = S *
C * LOW INITIAL CURVATURE VALUE = KLOW *
C * LOW FINAL CURVATURE VALUE = KLOWEND *
C * HIGH INITIAL CURVATURE VALUE = KHIGH *
C * MIDDLE INITIAL CURVATURE VALUE = KMID *
C * MIDDLE FINAL CURVATURE VALUE = KMIDEND *
C * TOLERANCE = EPS *
C * SLOPE OF BEAM AT FIXED END = PHI *
C * *
C **************************************************
IMPLICIT NONE
DOUBLE PRECISION PHI, F, S, L, ALPHA, FORCE, E,
+I, X, Y, KLOW, KMID, KHIGH, KLOWEND, KMIDEND,
EPS INTEGER(4) N, NVALS
OPEN(UNIT = 10, FILE='EULER.IN', STATUS='OLD')
OPEN(UNIT = 20, FILE='EULER.OUT', STATUS='UNKNOWN')
READ(10,*) PHI, S, L, ALPHA, FORCE, E, I, KLOW,
+K HIGH, EPS
WRITE(20,100) FORCE, E, I, S, L, ALPHA, KLOW, KHIGH,
+EPS

40
100 FORMAT(1X, T30, 'EULER.FOR', //'INPUTS:', //1X,
+'FORCE = ',F8.4, ' N' /1X, 'E = ', E16.4,
+' PA' /1X, 'I = ',E16.4, ' M^4' /1X, 'S = ',
+F13.5, ' M' /1X, 'L = ',F12.4, ' M' /1X,
+'ALPHA = ',F8.4, ' DEGREES', /1X, 'KLOW = ',
+F9.4, ' 1/M', /1X, 'KHIGH = ',F8.4, ' 1/M'
+/1X, 'EPS = ',E14.4, ' 1/M' // 'INITIAL
+CONDITIONS:')

WRITE(20,200) PHI, KMID, X ,Y

200 FORMAT(/1X, 'PHI = ',F10.4, ' RAD' /1X, 'KMID = ',
+ F9.4, ' 1/M' /1X, 'X = ', F12.4, ' M' /1X, 'Y = ',
+F12.4, ' M' //T9,'PHI (RAD)', T22,'KAPPA (1/M)',
+T41,'X (M)',T56'Y (M)'/)

ALPHA = ALPHA*DACOS(-1.0D0)/180
C **************************************************
C * THE FIRST DO LOOP CALCULATES KLOWEND USING *
C * THE INPUT VALUE OF KLOW *
C **************************************************
NVALS = L/S
KLOWEND = KLOW
DO 10 N = 1, NVALS
C PHI = PHI + S * KLOWEND
KLOWEND = KLOWEND + S * F(PHI,ALPHA,FORCE,E,I)

10 CONTINUE
C **************************************************
C * THE SECOND DO LOOP CALCULATES KMID USING THE *
C * BISECTION METHOD AS LONG AS THE DIFFERENCE *
C * OF LOW AND KHIGH IS GREATER THAN THE *
C * SPECIFIED TOLERANCE *
C **************************************************
DO 20 WHILE (ABS(KLOW - KHIGH).GT.EPS)

KMID = (KHIGH + KLOW)/2

KMIDEND = KMID

PHI = 0

41
C **************************************************
C * THE THIRD DO LOOP CALCULATES KMIDEND USING *
C * THE CALCULATED VALUE OF KMID FROM ABOVE *
C **************************************************

DO 30 N = 1, NVALS
PHI = PHI + S * KMIDEND
KMIDEND = KMIDEND + S * F(PHI,ALPHA,FORCE,E,I)

30 CONTINUE
C **************************************************
C * THE IF THEN STATEMENT DETERMINES WHETHER *
C * KHIGH OR KLOW BECOME THE NEW KMID AND THE *
C * ITERATION STARTS OVER *
C **************************************************
IF (KLOWEND * KMIDEND .LT. 0) THEN
KHIGH = KMID
ELSE
KLOW = KMID
KLOWEND = KMIDEND
END IF

20 CONTINUE
PHI = 0
X=0
Y=0

WRITE(20,300)PHI, KMID, X, Y
C **************************************************
C * THE FOURTH DO LOOP USES THE FINAL KMID *
C * VALUE FROM ABOVE TO CALCULATE PHI, KAPPA, *
C * X & Y USING EULERS METHOD *
C **************************************************
DO 40 N = 1, NVALS
PHI = PHI + S * KMID
KMID = KMID + S * F(PHI,ALPHA,FORCE,E,I)

X = X + COS(PHI)*S

42
 Y = Y + SIN(PHI)*
WRITE(20,300) PHI, KMID, X, Y
300 FORMAT(1X, 4(F15.7))
40 CONTINUE

END

DOUBLE PRECISION FUNCTION F(PHI, ALPHA, FORCE, E, I)

DOUBLE PRECISION PHI, FORCE, E, I, ALPHA

F = (-FORCE/(E*I))*(SIN(ALPHA)*COS(PHI)+
+COS(ALPHA)*SIN(PHI))
END

43
 APPENDIX B
FORTRAN PROGRAM OUTPUT OF EXPERIMENT 1

EULER.FOR

INPUTS:
FORCE = 3.9200 N
E = .2000E+12 PA
I = .1202E-11 M^4
S = .00100 M
L = .3000 M
ALPHA = 90.0000 DEGREES
KLOW = .0000 1/M
KHIGH = 10.0000 1/M
EPS = .1000E-09 1/M
INITIAL CONDITIONS:
PHI = .0000 RAD
KMID = .0000 1/M
X = .0000 M
Y = .0000 M
PHI (RAD) KAPPA (1/M) X (M) Y (M)
.0000000 4.3767068 .0000000 .0000000
.0043767 4.3604035 .0010000 .0000044
.0087371 4.3441007 .0020000 .0000131
.0130812 4.3277986 .0029999 .0000262
.0174090 4.3114976 .0039997 .0000436
.0217205 4.2951980 .0049995 .0000653
.0260157 4.2789000 .0059991 .0000913
.0302946 4.2626040 .0069987 .0001216
.0345572 4.2463103 .0079981 .0001562
.0388035 4.2300191 .0089973 .0001950
.0430335 4.2137307 .0099964 .0002380
.0472473 4.1974455 .0109953 .0002852
.0514447 4.1811636 .0119940 .0003366
.0556259 4.1648853 .0129924 .0003922
.0597908 4.1486110 .0139906 .0004520
.0639394 4.1323408 .0149886 .0005159
.0680717 4.1160751 .0159863 .0005839
.0721878 4.0998141 .0169837 .0006560
44
.0762876 4.0835581 .0179808 .0007322
.0803712 4.0673073 .0189775 .0008125
.0844385 4.0510619 .0199740 .0008969
.0884895 4.0348222 .0209701 .0009852
.0925244 4.0185885 .0219658 .0010776
.0965429 4.0023609 .0229611 .0011740
.1005453 3.9861398 .0239561 .0012744
.1045314 3.9699253 .0249506 .0013787
.1085014 3.9537177 .0259447 .0014870
.1124551 3.9375172 .0269384 .0015993
.1163926 3.9213241 .0279317 .0017154
.1203139 3.9051385 .0289244 .0018354
.1242191 3.8889606 .0299167 .0019593
.1281080 3.8727908 .0309085 .0020871
.1319808 3.8566291 .0318998 .0022187
.1358374 3.8404758 .0328906 .0023541
.1396779 3.8243311 .0338809 .0024933
.1435023 3.8081952 .0348706 .0026363
.1473104 3.7920684 .0358598 .0027831
.1511025 3.7759507 .0368484 .0029336
.1548785 3.7598423 .0378364 .0030879
.1586383 3.7437436 .0388238 .0032459
.1623821 3.7276546 .0398107 .0034075
.1661097 3.7115755 .0407969 .0035729
.1698213 3.6955066 .0417825 .0037419
.1735168 3.6794480 .0427675 .0039145
.1771962 3.6633998 .0437519 .0040908
.1808596 3.6473622 .0447356 .0042707
.1845070 3.6313355 .0457186 .0044541
.1881383 3.6153197 .0467009 .0046412
.1917537 3.5993151 .0476826 .0048317
.1953530 3.5833217 .0486636 .0050259
.1989363 3.5673398 .0496439 .0052235
.2025036 3.5513695 .0506234 .0054246
.2060550 3.5354109 .0516023 .0056292
.2095904 3.5194642 .0525804 .0058373
.2131099 3.5035295 .0535578 .0060488
.2166134 3.4876071 .0545344 .0062637
.2201010 3.4716969 .0555103 .0064820
.2235727 3.4557992 .0564854 .0067037
.2270285 3.4399141 .0574597 .0069288
.2304684 3.4240417 .0584333 .0071573
.2338925 3.4081822 .0594061 .0073890
.2373006 3.3923356 .0603780 .0076241
.2406930 3.3765021 .0613492 .0078625
.2440695 3.3606818 .0623196 .0081041
.2474302 3.3448749 .0632891 .0083490
.2507750 3.3290814 .0642578 .0085972
.2541041 3.3133015 .0652257 .0088486
.2574174 3.2975352 .0661928 .0091032
.2607150 3.2817827 .0671590 .0093609
45
.2639967 3.2660440 .0681243 .0096219
.2672628 3.2503194 .0690888 .0098860
.2705131 3.2346088 .0700525 .0101532
.2737477 3.2189124 .0710152 .0104235
.2769666 3.2032303 .0719771 .0106970
.2801699 3.1875625 .0729381 .0109735
.2833574 3.1719092 .0738983 .0112531
.2865293 3.1562704 .0748575 .0115357
.2896856 3.1406463 .0758158 .0118213
.2928262 3.1250368 .0767732 .0121100
.2959513 3.1094421 .0777298 .0124017
.2990607 3.0938623 .0786854 .0126963
.3021546 3.0782974 .0796401 .0129939
.3052329 3.0627476 .0805939 .0132944
.3082956 3.0472128 .0815467 .0135978
.3113428 3.0316931 .0824986 .0139041
.3143745 3.0161887 .0834496 .0142134
.3173907 3.0006995 .0843997 .0145255
.3203914 2.9852257 .0853488 .0148404
.3233767 2.9697673 .0862970 .0151582
.3263464 2.9543243 .0872442 .0154787
.3293007 2.9388969 .0881904 .0158021
.3322396 2.9234850 .0891358 .0161283
.3351631 2.9080887 .0900801 .0164572
.3380712 2.8927081 .0910235 .0167889
.3409639 2.8773431 .0919659 .0171233
.438413 2.8619940 .0929074 .0174604
.3467033 2.8466606 .0938479 .0178002
.3495499 2.8313431 .0947874 .0181427
.3523813 2.8160414 .0957260 .0184878
.3551973 2.8007556 .0966636 .0188356
.3579981 2.7854858 .0976002 .0191860
.3607835 2.7702319 .0985358 .0195390
.3635538 2.7549941 .0994704 .0198946
.3663088 2.7397722 .1004041 .0202527
.3690485 2.7245665 .1013368 .0206135
.3717731 2.7093768 .1022684 .0209767
.3744825 2.6942032 .1031991 .0213425
.3771767 2.6790457 .1041288 .0217108
.3798557 2.6639044 .1050576 .0220816
.3825196 2.6487792 .1059853 .0224549
.3851684 2.6336703 .1069120 .0228306
.3878021 2.6185774 .1078378 .0232087
.3904207 2.6035008 .1087625 .0235893
.3930242 2.5884404 .1096863 .0239723
.3956126 2.5733962 .1106090 .0243577
.3981860 2.5583682 .1115308 .0247454
.4007444 2.5433565 .1124516 .0251355
.4032877 2.5283610 .1133713 .0255280
.4058161 2.5133817 .1142901 .0259227
.4083295 2.4984186 .1152079 .0263198
46
.4108279 2.4834717 .1161247 .0267192
.4133114 2.4685411 .1170405 .0271208
.4157799 2.4536266 .1179553 .0275247
.4182335 2.4387284 .1188691 .0279309
.4206723 2.4238463 .1197819 .0283393
.4230961 2.4089805 .1206937 .0287498
.4255051 2.3941308 .1216046 .0291626
.4278992 2.3792973 .1225144 .0295776
.4302785 2.3644799 .1234233 .0299947
.4326430 2.3496786 .1243311 .0304140
.4349927 2.3348934 .1252380 .0308354
.4373276 2.3201243 .1261439 .0312589
.4396477 2.3053713 .1270488 .0316845
.4419531 2.2906343 .1279527 .0321122
.4442437 2.2759133 .1288556 .0325420
.4465196 2.2612083 .1297576 .0329738
.4487808 2.2465193 .1306586 .0334077
.4510273 2.2318461 .1315586 .0338436
.4532592 2.2171889 .1324576 .0342815
.4554764 2.2025476 .1333557 .0347214
.4576789 2.1879221 .1342527 .0351632
.4598668 2.1733123 .1351488 .0356071
.4620402 2.1587184 .1360440 .0360528
.4641989 2.1441401 .1369382 .0365006
.4663430 2.1295776 .1378314 .0369502
.4684726 2.1150307 .1387236 .0374017
.4705876 2.1004993 .1396149 .0378551
.4726881 2.0859836 .1405053 .0383104
.4747741 2.0714834 .1413947 .0387675
.4768456 2.0569986 .1422831 .0392265
.4789026 2.0425292 .1431706 .0396873
.4809451 2.0280753 .1440572 .0401499
.4829732 2.0136366 .1449428 .0406143
.4849868 1.9992133 .1458275 .0410805
.4869860 1.9848051 .1467112 .0415485
.4889708 1.9704121 .1475941 .0420182
.4909413 1.9560343 .1484760 .0424897
.4928973 1.9416715 .1493569 .0429629
.4948390 1.9273237 .1502370 .0434377
.4967663 1.9129909 .1511161 .0439143
.4986793 1.8986729 .1519943 .0443926
.5005780 1.8843698 .1528716 .0448725
.5024623 1.8700815 .1537480 .0453541
.5043324 1.8558078 .1546235 .0458373
.5061882 1.8415488 .1554981 .0463222
.5080298 1.8273044 .1563718 .0468086
.5098571 1.8130745 .1572446 .0472967
.5116701 1.7988591 .1581166 .0477863
.5134690 1.7846580 .1589876 .0482775
.5152537 1.7704713 .1598578 .0487703
.5170241 1.7562988 .1607271 .0492646
47
.5187804 1.7421404 .1615955 .0497604
.5205226 1.7279962 .1624630 .0502577
.5222506 1.7138660 .1633297 .0507566
.5239644 1.6997498 .1641956 .0512569
.5256642 1.6856474 .1650606 .0517587
.5273498 1.6715589 .1659247 .0522619
.5290214 1.6574841 .1667880 .0527666
.5306789 1.6434229 .1676505 .0532727
.5323223 1.6293754 .1685121 .0537803
.5339517 1.6153413 .1693729 .0542892
.5355670 1.6013207 .1702329 .0547995
.5371683 1.5873134 .1710921 .0553112
.5387556 1.5733193 .1719504 .0558243
.5403290 1.5593384 .1728079 .0563387
.5418883 1.5453707 .1736647 .0568545
.5434337 1.5314159 .1745206 .0573716
.5449651 1.5174741 .1753758 .0578899
.5464826 1.5035451 .1762301 .0584096
.5479861 1.4896288 .1770837 .0589306
.5494757 1.4757253 .1779365 .0594528
.5509515 1.4618343 .1787885 .0599763
.5524133 1.4479558 .1796398 .0605011
.5538612 1.4340897 .1804903 .0610271
.5552953 1.4202359 .1813400 .0615542
.5567156 1.4063943 .1821890 .0620826
.5581220 1.3925649 .1830373 .0626122
.5595145 1.3787475 .1838848 .0631430
.5608933 1.3649421 .1847316 .0636750
.5622582 1.3511485 .1855776 .0642081
.5636094 1.3373666 .1864230 .0647423
.5649467 1.3235964 .1872676 .0652777
.5662703 1.3098378 .1881115 .0658142
.5675802 1.2960907 .1889547 .0663518
.5688763 1.2823549 .1897972 .0668904
.5701586 1.2686304 .1906390 .0674302
.5714272 1.2549170 .1914801 .0679710
.5726822 1.2412148 .1923206 .0685129
.5739234 1.2275235 .1931604 .0690559
.5751509 1.2138431 .1939995 .0695998
.5763647 1.2001735 .1948379 .0701448
.5775649 1.1865145 .1956757 .0706908
.5787514 1.1728661 .1965129 .0712378
.5799243 1.1592282 .1973494 .0717857
.5810835 1.1456007 .1981852 .0723347
.5822291 1.1319834 .1990205 .0728845
.5833611 1.1183762 .1998551 .0734354
.5844795 1.1047792 .2006891 .0739871
.5855843 1.0911920 .2015225 .0745398
.5866755 1.0776147 .2023553 .0750934
.5877531 1.0640472 .2031875 .0756479
.5888171 1.0504892 .2040191 .0762033
48
.5898676 1.0369408 .2048501 .0767595
.5909046 1.0234018 .2056805 .0773167
.5919280 1.0098721 .2065104 .0778746
.5929378 .9963516 .2073397 .0784334
.5939342 .9828402 .2081684 .0789930
.5949170 .9693377 .2089966 .0795535
.5958864 .9558442 .2098243 .0801147
.5968422 .9423593 .2106514 .0806768
.5977846 .9288831 .2114780 .0812396
.5987134 .9154155 .2123040 .0818031
.5996289 .9019562 .2131296 .0823675
.6005308 .8885053 .2139546 .0829326
.6014193 .8750625 .2147791 .0834984
.6022944 .8616279 .2156032 .0840649
.6031560 .8482011 .2164267 .0846322
.6040042 .8347823 .2172498 .0852001
.6048390 .8213712 .2180724 .0857687
.6056604 .8079676 .2188945 .0863380
.6064683 .7945716 .2197162 .0869080
.6072629 .7811830 .2205374 .0874786
.6080441 .7678017 .2213582 .0880499
.6088119 .7544275 .2221785 .0886218
.6095663 .7410603 .2229984 .0891943
.6103074 .7277001 .2238179 .0897674
.6110351 .7143467 .2246369 .0903411
.6117494 .7009999 .2254556 .0909154
.6124504 .6876598 .2262738 .0914903
.6131381 .6743260 .2270916 .0920657
.6138124 .6609986 .2279091 .0926417
.6144734 .6476774 .2287262 .0932183
.6151211 .6343623 .2295429 .0937953
.6157554 .6210532 .2303592 .0943729
.6163765 .6077499 .2311752 .0949510
.6169842 .5944524 .2319908 .0955295
.6175787 .5811605 .2328061 .0961086
.6181599 .5678740 .2336211 .0966881
.6187277 .5545929 .2344357 .0972681
.6192823 .5413171 .2352500 .0978486
.6198236 .5280464 .2360639 .0984295
.6203517 .5147807 .2368776 .0990108
.6208665 .5015198 .2376910 .0995926
.6213680 .4882638 .2385041 .1001747
.6218563 .4750123 .2393169 .1007572
.6223313 .4617654 .2401294 .1013402
.6227930 .4485229 .2409417 .1019235
.6232416 .4352846 .2417536 .1025072
.6236768 .4220505 .2425654 .1030912
.6240989 .4088204 .2433769 .1036755
.6245077 .3955942 .2441881 .1042602
.6249033 .3823718 .2449991 .1048453
.6252857 .3691530 .2458099 .1054306
49
.6256548 .3559377 .2466205 .1060162
.6260108 .3427259 .2474309 .1066021
.6263535 .3295173 .2482411 .1071883
.6266830 .3163119 .2490510 .1077748
.6269993 .3031094 .2498608 .1083615
.6273024 .2899099 .2506704 .1089485
.6275923 .2767132 .2514799 .1095357
.6278691 .2635191 .2522892 .1101231
.6281326 .2503275 .2530983 .1107107
.6283829 .2371384 .2539073 .1112986
.6286200 .2239515 .2547161 .1118866
.6288440 .2107667 .2555248 .1124748
.6290548 .1975840 .2563334 .1130632
.6292523 .1844032 .2571419 .1136517
.6294367 .1712241 .2579502 .1142404
.6296080 .1580467 .2587585 .1148292
.6297660 .1448708 .2595667 .1154182
.6299109 .1316963 .2603747 .1160073
.6300426 .1185231 .2611827 .1165964
.6301611 .1053510 .2619907 .1171857
.6302665 .0921799 .2627985 .1177751
.6303586 .0790097 .2636064 .1183645
.6304377 .0658403 .2644141 .1189540
.6305035 .0526714 .2652219 .1195436
.6305562 .0395031 .2660296 .1201332
.6305957 .0263352 .2668372 .1207228
.6306220 .0131675 .2676449 .1213124
.6306352 .0000000 .2684525 .1219021

50
 APPENDIX C
FORTRAN PROGRAM OUTPUT OF EXPERIMENT 2

EULER.FOR

INPUTS:
FORCE = 3.9200 N
E = .2000E+12 PA
I = .1202E-11 M^4
S = .00100 M
L = .3000 M
ALPHA = 53.0000 DEGREES
KLOW = .0000 1/M
KHIGH = 10.0000 1/M
EPS = .1000E-09 1/M
INITIAL CONDITIONS:
PHI = .0000 RAD
KMID = .0000 1/M
X = .0000 M
Y = .0000 M
PHI (RAD) KAPPA (1/M) X (M) Y (M)
.0000000 4.7156453 .0000000 .0000000
.0047156 4.7025787 .0010000 .0000047
.0094182 4.6894663 .0019999 .0000141
.0141077 4.6763087 .0029998 .0000282
.0187840 4.6631061 .0039997 .0000470
.0234471 4.6498592 .0049994 .0000705
.0280970 4.6365681 .0059990 .0000986
.0327335 4.6232335 .0069985 .0001313
.0373568 4.6098556 .0079978 .0001686
.0419666 4.5964349 .0089969 .0002106
.0465631 4.5829718 .0099958 .0002571
.0511460 4.5694666 .0109945 .0003083
.0557155 4.5559199 .0119929 .0003639
.0602714 4.5423321 .0129911 .0004242
.0648137 4.5287034 .0139890 .0004890
.0693425 4.5150343 .0149866 .0005582
.0738575 4.5013253 .0159839 .0006320
.0783588 4.4875767 .0169808 .0007103
51
.0828464 4.4737889 .0179774 .0007931
.0873202 4.4599623 .0189736 .0008803
.0917801 4.4460973 .0199694 .0009719
.0962262 4.4321943 .0209648 .0010680
.1006584 4.4182538 .0219597 .0011685
.1050767 4.4042760 .0229542 .0012734
.1094810 4.3902613 .0239482 .0013826
.1138712 4.3762103 .0249417 .0014963
.1182474 4.3621232 .0259347 .0016142
.1226096 4.3480004 .0269272 .0017365
.1269576 4.3338424 .0279192 .0018631
.1312914 4.3196494 .0289106 .0019941
.1356110 4.3054219 .0299014 .0021293
.1399165 4.2911603 .0308916 .0022687
.1442076 4.2768649 .0318812 .0024124
.1484845 4.2625361 .0328702 .0025604
.1527470 4.2481743 .0338586 .0027125
.1569952 4.2337798 .0348463 .0028689
.1612290 4.2193531 .0358333 .0030294
.1654483 4.2048944 .0368197 .0031941
.1696532 4.1904042 .0378053 .0033629
.1738436 4.1758829 .0387902 .0035359
.1780195 4.1613306 .0397744 .0037130
.1821808 4.1467480 .0407579 .0038942
.1863276 4.1321352 .0417406 .0040794
.1904597 4.1174927 .0427225 .0042687
.1945772 4.1028207 .0437036 .0044621
.1986800 4.0881198 .0446839 .0046595
.2027682 4.0733901 .0456635 .0048608
.2068416 4.0586321 .0466421 .0050662
.2109002 4.0438461 .0476200 .0052755
.2149440 4.0290324 .0485970 .0054888
.2189731 4.0141915 .0495731 .0057061
.2229873 3.9993235 .0505483 .0059272
.2269866 3.9844289 .0515227 .0061523
.2309710 3.9695081 .0524961 .0063812
.2349405 3.9545612 .0534687 .0066140
.2388951 3.9395887 .0544403 .0068506
.2428347 3.9245910 .0554109 .0070910
.2467593 3.9095682 .0563806 .0073353
.2506688 3.8945208 .0573494 .0075834
.2545633 3.8794491 .0583172 .0078352
.2584428 3.8643534 .0592839 .0080908
.2623071 3.8492340 .0602497 .0083501
.2661564 3.8340912 .0612145 .0086131
.2699905 3.8189254 .0621783 .0088798
.2738094 3.8037368 .0631410 .0091502
.2776131 3.7885258 .0641028 .0094243
.2814017 3.7732927 .0650634 .0097020
.2851750 3.7580378 .0660230 .0099833
.2889330 3.7427613 .0669816 .0102682
52
.2926758 3.7274637 .0679391 .0105567
.2964032 3.7121451 .0688955 .0108488
.3001154 3.6968059 .0698508 .0111445
.3038122 3.6814465 .0708050 .0114436
.3074936 3.6660669 .0717581 .0117463
.3111597 3.6506677 .0727100 .0120525
.3148104 3.6352490 .0736609 .0123621
.3184456 3.6198112 .0746106 .0126752
.3220654 3.6043545 .0755592 .0129917
.3256698 3.5888792 .0765066 .0133116
.3292586 3.5733856 .0774529 .0136350
.3328320 3.5578739 .0783980 .0139617
.3363899 3.5423445 .0793420 .0142918
.3399322 3.5267976 .0802848 .0146252
.3434590 3.5112335 .0812264 .0149620
.3469703 3.4956524 .0821668 .0153020
.3504659 3.4800547 .0831060 .0156453
.3539460 3.4644405 .0840440 .0159920
.3574104 3.4488102 .0849808 .0163418
.3608592 3.4331640 .0859164 .0166949
.3642924 3.4175022 .0868508 .0170512
.3677099 3.4018249 .0877839 .0174106
.3711117 3.3861326 .0887158 .0177733
.3744979 3.3704253 .0896465 .0181391
.3778683 3.3547034 .0905760 .0185080
.3812230 3.3389671 .0915042 .0188801
.3845620 3.3232167 .0924312 .0192553
.3878852 3.3074524 .0933569 .0196335
.3911926 3.2916744 .0942813 .0200148
.3944843 3.2758830 .0952045 .0203991
.3977602 3.2600783 .0961265 .0207865
.4010203 3.2442608 .0970471 .0211768
.4042645 3.2284304 .0979665 .0215702
.4074930 3.2125876 .0988846 .0219665
.4107055 3.1967325 .0998015 .0223657
.4139023 3.1808654 .1007170 .0227679
.4170831 3.1649864 .1016313 .0231730
.4202481 3.1490958 .1025443 .0235810
.4233972 3.1331937 .1034560 .0239919
.4265304 3.1172805 .1043664 .0244056
.4296477 3.1013564 .1052755 .0248221
.4327491 3.0854214 .1061833 .0252415
.4358345 3.0694759 .1070898 .0256637
.4389039 3.0535200 .1079951 .0260886
.4419575 3.0375540 .1088990 .0265163
.4449950 3.0215781 .1098016 .0269468
.4480166 3.0055924 .1107029 .0273799
.4510222 2.9895971 .1116029 .0278158
.4540118 2.9735925 .1125016 .0282544
.4569854 2.9575787 .1133990 .0286956
.4599430 2.9415559 .1142951 .0291395
53
.4628845 2.9255243 .1151898 .0295861
.4658100 2.9094841 .1160833 .0300352
.4687195 2.8934356 .1169754 .0304870
.4716130 2.8773787 .1178663 .0309413
.4744903 2.8613138 .1187558 .0313982
.4773517 2.8452410 .1196440 .0318576
.4801969 2.8291605 .1205309 .0323196
.4830261 2.8130725 .1214165 .0327840
.4858391 2.7969771 .1223008 .0332510
.4886361 2.7808745 .1231838 .0337204
.4914170 2.7647649 .1240654 .0341923
.4941817 2.7486484 .1249458 .0346666
.4969304 2.7325252 .1258248 .0351433
.4996629 2.7163954 .1267026 .0356224
.5023793 2.7002593 .1275790 .0361040
.5050796 2.6841169 .1284542 .0365878
.5077637 2.6679684 .1293280 .0370741
.5104317 2.6518141 .1302005 .0375626
.5130835 2.6356539 .1310718 .0380535
.5157191 2.6194881 .1319417 .0385466
.5183386 2.6033169 .1328103 .0390421
.5209419 2.5871403 .1336777 .0395398
.5235291 2.5709585 .1345437 .0400397
.5261000 2.5547716 .1354085 .0405419
.5286548 2.5385798 .1362720 .0410462
.5311934 2.5223832 .1371342 .0415528
.5337158 2.5061820 .1379951 .0420615
.5362219 2.4899763 .1388548 .0425724
.5387119 2.4737662 .1397131 .0430855
.5411857 2.4575518 .1405702 .0436006
.5436432 2.4413333 .1414261 .0441179
.5460846 2.4251108 .1422806 .0446372
.5485097 2.4088843 .1431339 .0451586
.5509186 2.3926542 .1439860 .0456821
.5533112 2.3764203 .1448368 .0462076
.5556876 2.3601830 .1456863 .0467351
.5580478 2.3439422 .1465346 .0472647
.5603918 2.3276981 .1473817 .0477962
.5627195 2.3114509 .1482275 .0483297
.5650309 2.2952005 .1490720 .0488651
.5673261 2.2789472 .1499154 .0494025
.5696051 2.2626910 .1507575 .0499418
.5718678 2.2464320 .1515984 .0504830
.5741142 2.2301704 .1524381 .0510261
.5763444 2.2139062 .1532765 .0515711
.5785583 2.1976396 .1541138 .0521179
.5807559 2.1813705 .1549498 .0526665
.5829373 2.1650992 .1557847 .0532170
.5851024 2.1488258 .1566183 .0537693
.5872512 2.1325502 .1574508 .0543234
.5893837 2.1162727 .1582821 .0548792
54
.5915000 2.0999932 .1591122 .0554368
.5936000 2.0837119 .1599411 .0559962
.5956837 2.0674289 .1607689 .0565572
.5977512 2.0511442 .1615955 .0571200
.5998023 2.0348580 .1624209 .0576845
.6018372 2.0185703 .1632452 .0582507
.6038557 2.0022811 .1640684 .0588185
.6058580 1.9859906 .1648904 .0593880
.6078440 1.9696989 .1657113 .0599591
.6098137 1.9534060 .1665310 .0605318
.6117671 1.9371119 .1673497 .0611061
.6137042 1.9208168 .1681672 .0616820
.6156250 1.9045208 .1689836 .0622595
.6175296 1.8882238 .1697989 .0628385
.6194178 1.8719260 .1706131 .0634190
.6212897 1.8556274 .1714262 .0640011
.6231453 1.8393281 .1722383 .0645847
.6249847 1.8230282 .1730493 .0651698
.6268077 1.8067277 .1738592 .0657564
.6286144 1.7904266 .1746680 .0663444
.6304048 1.7741251 .1754758 .0669339
.6321790 1.7578231 .1762825 .0675248
.6339368 1.7415208 .1770882 .0681171
.6356783 1.7252181 .1778929 .0687108
.6374035 1.7089152 .1786966 .0693059
.6391124 1.6926121 .1794992 .0699024
.6408051 1.6763089 .1803008 .0705002
.6424814 1.6600055 .1811014 .0710994
.6441414 1.6437021 .1819010 .0716999
.6457851 1.6273986 .1826997 .0723018
.6474125 1.6110952 .1834973 .0729049
.6490236 1.5947918 .1842940 .0735093
.6506184 1.5784885 .1850897 .0741150
.6521968 1.5621854 .1858844 .0747219
.6537590 1.5458824 .1866782 .0753301
.6553049 1.5295797 .1874711 .0759395
.6568345 1.5132772 .1882630 .0765501
.6583478 1.4969751 .1890540 .0771619
.6598447 1.4806732 .1898441 .0777749
.6613254 1.4643717 .1906333 .0783891
.6627898 1.4480706 .1914216 .0790044
.6642379 1.4317699 .1922090 .0796208
.6656696 1.4154697 .1929955 .0802384
.6670851 1.3991699 .1937811 .0808571
.6684843 1.3828707 .1945659 .0814769
.6698671 1.3665719 .1953498 .0820978
.6712337 1.3502737 .1961328 .0827198
.6725840 1.3339761 .1969150 .0833428
.6739180 1.3176791 .1976964 .0839668
.6752356 1.3013827 .1984770 .0845919
.6765370 1.2850870 .1992567 .0852180
55
.6778221 1.2687919 .2000357 .0858451
.6790909 1.2524975 .2008138 .0864732
.6803434 1.2362038 .2015912 .0871022
.6815796 1.2199107 .2023677 .0877323
.6827995 1.2036185 .2031435 .0883632
.6840031 1.1873269 .2039186 .0889951
.6851905 1.1710361 .2046929 .0896280
.6863615 1.1547461 .2054665 .0902617
.6875162 1.1384568 .2062393 .0908963
.6886547 1.1221683 .2070114 .0915318
.6897769 1.1058806 .2077828 .0921682
.6908828 1.0895938 .2085535 .0928054
.6919723 1.0733077 .2093234 .0934434
.6930457 1.0570224 .2100927 .0940823
.6941027 1.0407380 .2108614 .0947220
.6951434 1.0244544 .2116293 .0953625
.6961679 1.0081717 .2123966 .0960038
.6971760 .9918897 .2131633 .0966459
.6981679 .9756086 .2139293 .0972887
.6991435 .9593284 .2146947 .0979322
.7001029 .9430490 .2154595 .0985765
.7010459 .9267704 .2162237 .0992215
.7019727 .9104927 .2169872 .0998673
.7028832 .8942158 .2177502 .1005137
.7037774 .8779398 .2185126 .1011608
.7046553 .8616645 .2192744 .1018086
.7055170 .8453902 .2200357 .1024570
.7063624 .8291166 .2207965 .1031061
.7071915 .8128439 .2215566 .1037558
.7080043 .7965720 .2223163 .1044061
.7088009 .7803009 .2230754 .1050570
.7095812 .7640306 .2238341 .1057085
.7103453 .7477611 .2245922 .1063606
.7110930 .7314924 .2253499 .1070133
.7118245 .7152245 .2261070 .1076665
.7125397 .6989574 .2268637 .1083203
.7132387 .6826910 .2276200 .1089745
.7139214 .6664254 .2283758 .1096293
.7145878 .6501605 .2291312 .1102846
.7152380 .6338964 .2298861 .1109404
.7158719 .6176329 .2306406 .1115967
.7164895 .6013702 .2313947 .1122535
.7170909 .5851082 .2321484 .1129107
.7176760 .5688469 .2329018 .1135683
.7182448 .5525862 .2336547 .1142264
.7187974 .5363262 .2344073 .1148848
.7193337 .5200668 .2351596 .1155437
.7198538 .5038081 .2359115 .1162030
.7203576 .4875499 .2366631 .1168626
.7208452 .4712924 .2374143 .1175227
.7213164 .4550354 .2381652 .1181830
56
.7217715 .4387790 .2389159 .1188438
.7222103 .4225231 .2396662 .1195048
.7226328 .4062678 .2404163 .1201662
.7230391 .3900130 .2411661 .1208278
.7234291 .3737587 .2419156 .1214898
.7238028 .3575048 .2426649 .1221520
.7241603 .3412514 .2434140 .1228145
.7245016 .3249984 .2441628 .1234773
.7248266 .3087459 .2449114 .1241403
.7251353 .2924938 .2456598 .1248035
.7254278 .2762420 .2464081 .1254670
.7257041 .2599906 .2471561 .1261307
.7259641 .2437395 .2479039 .1267945
.7262078 .2274887 .2486516 .1274586
.7264353 .2112383 .2493992 .1281228
.7266465 .1949881 .2501466 .1287871
.7268415 .1787382 .2508939 .1294516
.7270202 .1624885 .2516410 .1301163
.7271827 .1462390 .2523881 .1307811
.7273290 .1299898 .2531350 .1314459
.7274590 .1137407 .2538819 .1321109
.7275727 .0974917 .2546287 .1327760
.7276702 .0812429 .2553754 .1334411
.7277514 .0649942 .2561221 .1341063
.7278164 .0487456 .2568687 .1347715
.7278652 .0324970 .2576153 .1354368
.7278977 .0162485 .2583619 .1361021
.7279139 .0000000 .2591085 .1367674

57