BUCKLING TEST

Name : Ahmed Sayed

ID : SUKD1503838
Contents

Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………................3

Objective …………………………………………………………………………...........……...3

Introduction……………………………………………………………………................……...3

Apparatus……………………………………………………………………………..…….…...4

Procedure………………………………………………………………………………………..5

Theory…………………………………………………………………………………………..6

Results and Calculation ………………………………………………………………………...7

Table 1…………………..……………………………………………………………………....7

Graph 1…………………..…………………………………………………………………….12

Table 2…………………..……………………………………………………………………..10

Graph 2…………………..…………………………………………………………………….12

Discussion................................................................................................................................... 9

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………..13
 1. Abstract :

The aim of this experiment is to study the effect of the buckling over a material with different
ways of fixing two types of steel with different lengths, there were two ways of fixing first, pin
and pin for S4 steel while the second was pin and fix for S6 steel the applied forces were known
and there were sensor attached for measuring the buckling of the steel bar in both cases for the
S4 experiment the axial forces reached until 500N while for S6 steel reaching 800N using these
measures the critical buckling will be determined and the theoretical deflection will be calculated
together with the percentage of error which will be determined depending on the accuracy of the
experiment.

-- Buckling is an unpredictability that leads to a structural failure. Once buckling commence this
uncertainty can lead to a failure. Therefore, in this experiment we determined the critical buckling loads
for a steel bar, in which one was under the connection of a pin and pin, the other case was under the
connection of a pin and fixed from the other side. The device used was the WP120. Both forces and
deflections were recorded in a table and a graph was made to show the outcome of the experiment. Also,
the critical force was calculated. Euler’s theory of buckling was also examined in this report.

2. Objective:

To determine the critical buckling loads for columns with supports.

To examine the Euler theory of buckling and plot a graph of force against deflection.
To investigate the influence of different of different material parameter.

3. Introduction:

Buckling is characterized by a sudden sideways failure of a structural member subjected to high

compressive stress. As an applied load is increased on a member, such as a column, it will
ultimately become large enough to cause the member to
become unstable and is said to have buckled.

And can be viewed ad in the figure

The study of the buckling force over the beams is very

critical matter, there are thousands of supports are
subjected to buckling forces as shows in simple way in the
figure.

There are many types of buckling depending on the

material and the type of fixing.

Buckling happens When a member is subjected to axial compression and if the member is
slender stick, then buckling occurs. This is a mode of failure of an element, it is not a type of
error or problem we want to have in out structure. The reason being, once a column buckles, it
induces eccentricity to the load, that eccentricity again induced additional moments which cause
it to deflect even more. So this goes on and on until the force and stress state converges taking
not that Buckling occurs suddenly and without warning when a certain limit load is attained
therefore it is an extremely dangerous type of failure, which must be avoided by all means to
have solid support.

A well-known theory for buckling was made by Euler back

in 1744. In his book of,Methodusinveniendilineascurvas, he
put down the Euler Buckling formula which he derived
analytically:

𝜋 2 𝐸𝑘
𝑃=
𝐿2
where L is the length of column and Ek is “absolute
elasticity of the column”.

It looks quite different from the Euler Buckling formula we

know in modern day:

𝜋 2 𝐸𝐼
𝑃=
𝐿2
Where L is the characteristic length of bar that takes both the Figure 1Leonhard Euler (1707-1783), Mathematician

actual length of the bar and the mounting conditions into

consideration.

as we know E is Young’s Modulus (stiffness) and I is moment of inertia. EI together means

stiffness against bending.

Euler was the first one who came up with the complete buckling formula. However, before
Euler, Musschenbroek did the first experiment regarding buckling.

However, what Musschenbroek found out was the buckling load is inversely proportional to the
square of compression member length. He did not figure out the relationship between buckling
load and stiffness of member.
4. APPARATUS :
X
i. WP120 Buckling Test device.
The unit essentially consists of:

a. Load spindle
b. Load nut
c. Load cross bar
d. Clamping screws
e. Guide columns
f. Force gauge
g. Attachment socket
Y
h. Basic frame
i. Force measuring device
ii. A specimen made of flat steel bar
iii. Measurement apparatus (ruler, caliper, divider, etc) Figure 4.1: Buckling
test device
 Figure 4.2: Buckling test device

Figure 4.3: Top specimen holder Figure 4.4: Bottom specimen holder

(From detail view X) (From detail view Y)

5. PROCEDURE

1. Euler Case 1 has been chosen to run the test on buckling of the specimen and the maximum force
is 450 N.
2. The thrust piece was inserted with V notch into attachment socket and fasten with clamping screw
 as shown in Figure E.
3. Long thrust piece was inserted with V notch into the guide bush of the load cross-bar and Hold it
firmly.
4. The specimen was inserted with edges in the V notch.
5. The load cross-bar was clamped on the guide column in such a manner that there is still approx.
5mm for the top thrust piece to move.
6. The specimen was aligned in such a manner that it’s buckling direction points in the direction of
the lateral guide columns. Here, the edges must be perpendicular to the load cross-bar.
7. Pre-tightened the specimen with low, non-measurable force.
8. Aligned the measuring gauge to the middle of the rod specimen using the support clamps. The
measuring gauge has been set at a right angle to the direction of buckling.
9. Pre-tightened the measuring gauge to 10 mm deflection with the adjustable support.
10. Slowly subjected the specimen load using the load nut.
11. The deflection was recorded from the measuring gauge. Read and record the deflection every
100N.
12. The result was tabulated and repeated the experiment twice for each connection.

Results:

For pin and pin S4 steel:

E = 210 x 109 N/m2

Length = 0.65 m

Width = 0.02 m

Thickness = 0.04 m

 = 0.455

1 1
𝐼𝑦𝑦 = ℎ𝑏 3 = (0.04)(0.02)3 = 26666.67𝑚𝑚4 = 2.667𝑋 10−8 𝑚4
12 12

1 1 −10 4
𝐼𝑥𝑥 = 𝑏ℎ3 = (0.02)(0.004)3 = 112.6𝑚𝑚4 = 1.0667 𝑋 10 𝑚
12 12
 𝜋 2 𝐸𝐼𝑥 𝜋 2 (210 x 109 )(1.0667 𝑋 10−10 )
𝐹𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 = = = 1067.9N
𝑙2 (0.455)2

For max deflection theoretical

P 𝐿
Ymax= e [sec (√EI 𝑥 2) − 1] for y max ------- e = 1

Buckling Force, F(N) Experimental Percentage error

Deflection, δ (mm) Theoretical %
Deflection, δ (mm)
100 0 0.071 -100.00
150 0.055 0.107 -48.60
200 0.105 0.142 -26.06
250 0.185 0.178 3.93
300 0.27 0.214 26.17
350 0.45 0.25 80.00
400 0.665 0.285 133.33
450 1.02 0.321 217.76
500 1.765 0.357 394.40
 force vs deflection
2
1.8
1.6
deflection (mm)

1.4
1.2
1
0.8 force vs deflection
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
force (N)

For pin and fix S6 steel:

Modulus of Elasticity = 200 x 109 N/m2

Length = 674 mm = 0.7x0.674 =0.4718 m

Width = 20.38mm

Thickness = 4.09 mm

1 1
𝐼𝑥𝑥 = 𝑏ℎ3 = (0.02038)(0.00409)3 = 1.162 × 10−10 𝑚4
12 12
𝜋 2 𝐸𝐼𝑦 𝜋 2 (210 x 109 )(1.162 × 10−10 )
𝐹𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 = = = 1082𝑁
𝑙2 (0.4718)2

Buckling Force, F(N) Experimental Theoretical Percentage error

Deflection, δ (mm) Deflection, δ (mm) %
 100 0 0.13 100.00
150 0.01 0.21 95.24
200 0.025 0.29 91.38
250 0.045 0.39 88.46
300 0.085 0.50 83.00
350 0.15 0.63 76.19
400 0.25 0.78 67.95
450 0.43 0.95 54.74
500 0.595 1.15 48.26
550 0.88 1.40 37.14
600 0.905 1.70 46.76
650 1.265 2.08 39.18
700 1.62 2.57 36.96
750 1.955 3.23 39.47
800 2.855 4.16 31.37
1 1
𝐼𝑦𝑦 = ℎ𝑏 3 = (0.00409)(0.02038)3 = 2.885 × 10−9 𝑚4
12 12
 force vs deflection
3

2.5

2
deflection (mm)

1.5
force vs deflection
1

0.5

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
force (N)

Discussion :

The results clearly shows that the deflection increase by increasing the force in non proportional
behavior that explain why the buckling happens suddenly when the forces exceeds the safety
limits, because it will reach the high deflection suddenly and fast.

The critical loading for pin and fix was higher than the pin and pin fixing that is related to the
higher stability for pin and fix because one of the sides will have reaction moment to hold the
bulking, also the pin and fix had different effective length which is 0.7 L that means that the
buckling has less chance to happen because it decrease the buckling effective length.

For the theoretical reading it shows great disappointment the results wasn’t expected to be that
bad and have that error% however it was stated after search that there are no specific formula for
the maximum deflection in case of axial buckling and all the available formulas have constants
depending on the boundary conditions that shows usually value of zero when the boundary
conditions used.

However there are chances that the experiment values are also faulty because the material had
been subjected to the test many times before, and also the sensor reading is inaccurate at all and
we needed to tab it every time after changing the force to give the reading otherwise it keep
showing the previous reading, and also the human error in taking the reading may be played a
big part during the test.

Conclusion:

The experiment shows a satisfying change of deflection with force for the theoretical and
experimental even when the theoretical values are much different from the experimental but both
are referring to the same concept which is the gradient change of buckling with axial force.

To avoid such mistake in the next experiment first of all there must be a defined formula for the
theoretical values and not just leave such critical value for the searching, also the equipment of
the experiment need maintenance since almost nothing works properly even for the specimen its
been suffering the buckling many times before, but for now the best way to improve the accuracy
is to repeat the experiment and take the average readings.

References :

i． Berham, P. P., Crawford, R. J., Armstrong, C. G. 1996, Mechanism of

Engineering Materials, 2nd Edition, Pearson Education Limited, China.
ii． Hibbeler, R. C. 2005, Mechanics of Materials, 6th Edition, Prentice Hall,
Singapore.