You are on page 1of 7

Table for aluminum beam of 12.5mm x 12.

5 mm
Load, W
(N)
1.962
3.924
5.886
7.848
9.810
Table 1

Load Cell, W2 (N)


Increasin Decreasin
Average
g load
g load
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.2
1.4
1.3
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.6
2.6
2.6
3.2
3.2
3.2

Dial Gauge, P (mm)


Increasin Decreasin
average
g load
g load
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.25
0.25
0.25

Table for stainless steel beam of 12.5 mm diameter


Table 2
Load, W
(N)
1.962
3.924
5.886
7.848
9.810

Increasing
load
1.00
1.60
2.50
3.60
5.00

Load Cell, W2 (N)


Decreasing
Average
load
2.80
1.90
3.20
2.40
3.60
3.05
4.20
3.90
5.00
5.00

Dial Gauge, P (mm)


Increasing
Decreasing
load
load
0.06
0.000
0.09
0.030
0.12
0.060
0.135
0.095
0.135
0.135

average
0.030
0.060
0.090
0.115
0.135

Deflection value for aluminum beam


Table 3
Load, W (N)
1.962
3.924
5.886
7.848
9.810

Experiment (mm)
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25

Macaulays Method (mm)


-0.0494
-0.0988
-0.1480
-0.1980
-0.2470

Experiment (mm)
0.03
0.06
0.09
0.115
0.135

Macaulays Method (mm)


-0.0309
-0.0618
-0.0926
-0.1240
-0.1540

Deflection value for stainless steel beam


Table 4
Load, W (N)
1.962
3.924
5.886
7.848
9.810

Table for value of W2


Table 5
Theoretical value (N)

Experimental Value (N)


Aluminum Beam
Stainless Steel Beam
0.6
1.9
1.3
2.4
2.0
3.05
2.6
3.9
3.2
5.0

0.61
1.23
1.84
2.45
3.01

Load Cell, W2 vs Load, W


6

4
Theoretical value
Aluminum beam
3

Stainless steel beam

10

11

From table 1, we know that the table contain data for deflection value of aluminum beam
that we collected from experiment we conducted in lab. The beam that we used for this
experiment is aluminum beam which has a square cross-section and has dimension of 12.5 mm x
12.5 mm. The reason why we took average value is to reduce error as minimum as possible. So
the data that we got from this experiment is reliable and more accurate. We vary the load from
0.2 kg to 1.0 kg but for calculation we need to convert this value to Newton so the converted
value is shown in the table.

Table 2 show us the data for deflection value of stainless steel beam that we collected
from the same experiment we conducted in the lab. The beam we used for this experiment is
stainless steel beam which has circle cross-section and has diameter of 12.5 mm. The reason why
we took average value is to reduce error as minimum as possible. So the data that we got from
this experiment is reliable and more accurate. We vary the load from 0.2 kg to 1.0 kg but for
calculation we need to convert this value to Newton so the converted value is shown in the table.

SAMPLE CALCULATION
Macaulays method
y = -0.007 (1.962) (0.83)
(190x109)(1.1984x10-9)

= - 0.0309 mm

Isteel = (0.01254)
64
= 1.1984 x 109 m4

Load vs Deflection for aluminum beam


0.3

0.25

0.2

Deflection,y (mm)

0.15

0.1

0.05

Load, W (N)

10

11

Load vs Deflection for stainless steel beam


0.16

0.14

0.12

0.1

Deflection,y (mm)

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

Load, W (N)

10

11

DISCUSSION
a) There is difference in deflection obtained from experiment and from Macaulays method
because of some error. First is apparatus error. The beam used in this experiment is
recycled mean that there are many group before us had been using the beam. The beam
has undergo many experiment and not in condition as the new beam. In order to get more
accurate data we need to use new beam. Next is the dial gauge is not fixed mean that any
vibration coming from the table can affect the its reading. So if we want to avoid this, this
experiment should been carried on a more stable table. Human error also cause data
obtained to differ from theoretical value. Error such as parallax error can be avoided by
placing eyes straight to the scale of dial gauge.

b) The knife support must be return to its original place because to ensure the beam is
always in horizontal position. If the beam is not horizontal, the data obtained will not be
accurate and increase the percentage of error.

c) Other method that we can use is double integration method and area-moment method.

Example : Area-moment method

d) Even if the equipment and environment is in perfect condition, the difference in


theoretical value and experiment value will also occur due to parallax error while taking
reading of dial gauge and other human error such as disturbance to the person who is
doing the experiment.

e) This beam problem is statically indeterminate when the static equilibrium equations are
insufficient for determining the internal forces and reactions on that beam. More equation
is needed to achieved more accurate result.
CONCLUSION
For the conclusion, we indeed fulfill the objective of this experiment which is to validate
the beam deflection formula using Macaulays method. The calculated value using Macaulays
method is slightly different from the experiment value. This means the method is usable and
applicable to determine the deflection of beam in real life.

REFERENCES

1. http://www.dcu.ie/sites/default/files/mechanical_engineering/pdfs/manuals/Beam
%20Apparatus(a).pdf
2. http://www.mathalino.com/reviewer/mechanics-and-strength-of-materials/chapter-6beam-deflections
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statically_indeterminate