TITLE: DEFLECTION 0F STATICALLY DETERMINATE BEAM
INTRODUCTION
Level 2 laboratory activities refer to the condition where only the problem is guided and given. Students
are required to find the ways & means and provide the answers to the given assignment using the group
creativity and innovativeness. The activity will enable the students to appreciate independent learning
and prepare them for a much harder task of open ended laboratory activities. In this partially open
laboratory activity, your group is required to carry out deflection test of simply supported and cantilever
beam.
OBJECTIVE
To examine the deflection of simply supported and cantilever beam subjected to an increasing point
load and to compare the deflection properties of three different materials.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Deflection formula for cantilever:
3
=
3
Deflection formula for simply supported beam:
3
=
48
Where;
W = Load (N)
L = Distance fron support to support (m)
E = Youngs modulus for cantilever material (N/m2)
I = Second moment area of the cantilever or beam (m4)
APPARATUS
1. Steel, Aluminium, Brass Beam.
2. Vernier Caliper.
3. Deflection measuring device.
4. 3N of loads.
5. Ruler.
6. A hanger.
PROCEDURE
a) Load keep at center of cantilever is verying, but distance between applied and fix end
same.
b) Mild steel is clamped at one end and the other end left free. At distance of 300mm from
the fixed end load is applied.
c) The deflection at the point of application of the load is noted. The load is varied as per
mention in table.
d) Load at the center of the cantilever is kept constant i.e 0.3N , distance between dial
indicator and clamped end is hanging.Mild steel is clamped at one end and the other end
left free.
e) The dial indicator was kept exactly at the fixed end of mild steel beam. Make the reading
of dial indicator zero.
f) The load of 0.5N initial at 300mm was put from fixed end. The dial indicator reading was
recorded.
g) The experiment was repeated by adding the load by 0.3N more. Adding the load was
continued until the load become 1.5N.
h) The reading was recorded in table. T he experiment was repeated by using different
material for the beam.
CANTILEVER BEAM
3N
0.25 m
ALUMINIUM
= 3.27 103
= 0.01906
= 69 2
3
=
12
(0.01906) (3.27 103 )
=
12
= 5.55 1011 4
STEEL
= 3.17 103
= 0.01903
= 207 2
3
=
12
(0.01903) (3.17 103 )3
=
12
= 5.05 1011 4
SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM
3N
0.3 m 0.3 m
ALUMINIUM
= 3.59 103
= 0.01934
= 69 2
3
=
12
(0.01934) (3.59 103 )3
=
12
= 7.46 1011 4
BRASSS
= 3.15 103
= 0.01903
= 105 2
3
=
12
(0.01903) (3.15 103 )3
=
12
= 4.96 1011 4
CANTILEVER
ALUMINIUM:
Load Deflection of Deflection of Percentage Modulus of Modulus of Percentage
(N) Experimental Theoretical Error of Elasticity, E Elasticity, E Error of
Value (m) Value (m) Deflection (%) Experiment Theoretical Modulus of
(GPa) (GPa) Elasticity, E
(%)
1 1.45 103 1.36 103 6.2 64 69 7.2
2 2.91 103 2.7 103 7.2 64 69 7.2
3 4.43 103 4.08 103 7.9 63 69 9.5
STEEL:
Load Deflection of Deflection of Percentage Modulus of Modulus of Percentage
(N) Experimental Theoretical Error of Elasticity, E Elasticity, E Error of
Value (m) Value (m) Deflection (%) Experiment Theoretical Modulus of
(GPa) (GPa) Elasticity, E
(%)
1 5.3 104 4.98 104 6.0 194 207 6.3
2 1.12 103 9.96 104 11.1 184 207 11.1
3 1.67 103 1.49 103 10.8 184 207 11.1
SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM
ALUMINIUM:
Percentage
Load Deflection of Deflection of Percentage Modulus of Modulus of Error of
(N) Experimental Theoretical Error of Elasticity, E Elasticity, E Modulus of
Value (m) Value (m) Deflection (%) Experiment Theoretical Elasticity, E
(GPa) (GPa) (%)
1 5.3 104 8.74 104 39.4 113 69 38.9
2 1.0 103 1.75 103 42.9 120 69 42.5
3 1.47 103 2.62 103 43.9 123 69 43.9
BRASS:
Load Deflection of Deflection of Percentage Modulus of Modulus of Percentage
(N) Experimental Theoretical Error of Elasticity, E Elasticity, E Error of
Value (m) Value (m) Deflection (%) Experiment Theoretical Modulus of
(GPa) (GPa) Elasticity, E
(%)
1 4.9 104 8.6 104 43.0 185 105 43.2
2 9.5 104 1.73 103 45.1 191 105 45.0
3 1.38 103 2.59 103 46.7 197 105 46.7
CALCULATION
Deflection of Theoretical Value (m)
Cantilever beam:
3
=
3
ALUMINIUM:
1N 2N 3N
(1)(0.25)3 (2)(0.25)3 (3)(0.25)3
= = =
3(6.9 1010 )(5.55 1011 ) 3(6.9 1010 )(5.55 1011 ) 3(6.9 1010 )(5.55 1011 )
= . = . = .
STEEL:
1N 2N 3N
(1)(0.25)3 (2)(0.25)3 (3)(0.25)3
= = =
3(2.07 1011 )(5.05 1011 ) 3(2.07 1011 )(5.05 1011 ) 3(2.07 1011 )(5.05 1011 )
= . = . = .
Simply supported beam:
3
=
48
ALUMINIUM:
1N 2N 3N
(1)(0.6)3 (2)(0.6)3 (3)(0.6)3
= = =
48(6.9 1010 )(7.46 1011 ) 48(6.9 1010 )(7.46 1011 ) 48(6.9 1010 )(7.46 1011 )
= . = . = .
BRASS:
1N 2N 3N
(1)(0.6)3 (2)(0.6)3 (3)(0.6)3
= = =
48(1.05 1011 )(4.96 1011 ) 48(1.05 1011 )(4.96 1011 ) 48(1.05 1011 )(4.96 1011 )
= . = . = .
Modulus of Elasticity, E Experimental (GPa)
Cantilever beam:
3
=
48
ALUMINIUM:
1N 2N 3N
(1)(0.25)3 (2)(0.25)3 (3)(0.25)3
= = =
3(1.45 103 )(5.55 1011 ) 3(2.91 103 )(5.55 1011 ) 3(4.43 103 )(5.55 1011 )
= = =
STEEL:
1N 2N 3N
(1)(0.25)3 (2)(0.25)3 (3)(0.25)3
= = =
3(5.3 104 )(5.05 1011 ) 3(1.12 103 )(5.05 1011 ) 3(1.67 103 )(5.05 1011 )
= = =
Simply supported beam:
3
=
3
ALUMINIUM:
1N 2N 3N
(1)(0.6)3 (2)(0.6)3 (3)(0.6)3
= = =
48(5.3 104 )(7.46 1011 ) 48(1.0 103 )(7.46 1011 ) 48(1.47 103 )(7.46 1011 )
= = =
STEEL:
1N 2N 3N
(1)(0.6)3 (2)(0.6)3 (3)(0.6)3
= = =
48(4.9 104 )(4.96 1011 ) 48(9.5 104 )(4.96 1011 ) 48(1.38 103 )(4.96 1011 )
= = =
Percentage Error of Deflection (%) and Modulus of Elasticity, E (%)
% = 100
DISCUSSION
Based on the experiment, the experiment results for deflection of cantilever beam and
deflection of simply supported beam were achieved. Then, the theoretical value of deflection can be
3 3
obtained by using the formula: Simply Supported Beam = 48
and Cantilever Beam = 3
. However,
the theoretical results were not as expected. There was significant error between experiment results
and theoretical values. The error was defined from the percentage error between the experiment value
and theoretical value. Besides, the comparison between experimental value and theoretical value of
deflection ( simply supported beam and cantilever beam ) can be determine from the graph obtained.
The error occurred due to the sensitivity and inaccuracy apparatus or the improper procedures. The
different loads applied on the beam can effects the error of the experiment value.
The modulus of elasticity, E (GPa) value given were used to calculate the deflection of the beam.
We used the modulus of elasticity theoretical value as given Aluminium is 69 GPa, Steel is 207 GPa and
Brass is 105 GPa instead, the modulus of elasticity experiment value can be determined from the
deflection of experiment values. The comparison of the both values were showed in the graph obtained.
CONCLUSION
As a conclusion, when a load is applied to a beam, either centrally over at another point, the
deflection can be mathematically estimated. Due to the error that occurred in this experiment, it is clear
that margins in safety factors, as well as thorough testing, is needed when utilizing beam design. We
need to reduce error as much as possible to obtain accuracy results in the experiment. Practically, to
avoid the error, we need to repeat the procedures of the experiment in order to gain accurate value for
the result.
