Mechanical Engineering Laboratory Report

Buckling Test

Name: Anas
Student ID:
Group ID:
Course Code: EME3411
Course Name: Laboratory Investigations 4
Submission Date:
ABSRACT
The experiment carried out is known as Buckling Test. The aims of this test is to
determine the Euler Buckling Load, PE, for the test structure, obtain a graph which relates the
force applied against the bending, figuring the critical loads and also to find out the safest type of
connection that has been put to test. The element used is Bucking occurs when column has a bias
to deflect vertically out of the line of action of the force. Once buckling procedure initiates, the
instability can lead indicate the force and the deflections throughout indicator by millimeter. The
rod used is Steel, the two typed of steel typed to S4 and S6, where the S4 can be forced from 0N
to 400N where the second one can be forced to 100 N. Furthermore, both having different
deflections. The force acting on the column can lead to failure because the eccentric force acts as
a moment causing greater stresses and deflections due to the combination of the bending and
axial forces. Moreover, 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. However, in this experiment Euler’s formula will be used to further understand.

OBJECTIVE
1. To determine the critical buckling loads for columns with supports.
2. To examine the Euler theory of buckling and plot a graph of force against deflection.

X
APPARATUS
i. WP120 Buckling Test device.
The unit essentially consists of:

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

Figure D: Buckling test device in the Lab

INTRODUCTION
The deformation of columns under load is a significant property of materials which has lo
be taken into account for designing and engineering calculations. Leonard Euler (1707, 1783)
was the first scientist who worked on that and derived equations related to this Property. In
buckling test the maximum load which is the largest load a column can support before
deformation is associated with Young modulus (Eh, moment of inertia and the length of the
specimen, if a proper material is used the result will be reliable and accurate enough. The
material used in this experiment is steel.
Euler formula:

Buckling occurs suddenly and without warning when a certain limit load is attained. It
is therefore an extremely dangerous type of failure, which must be avoided by all
means. As soon as a rod begins to buckle, it will become deformed to the point of total
destruction. This is typical unstable behavior. Buckling is a stability problem. The
critical limit load, Fkrit, above which buckling can occur, is dependent on both the
slenderness of the rod, i.e. influence of length and diameter, and the material used. In
order to define slenderness, the slenderness ratio, λ will be introduced here:

lk

i

(equation 1)

where, l k = characteristic length of bar that takes both the actual length
of the bar and the mounting conditions into consideration.
 Figure B: Euler cases of buckling

For example, clamping the ends of the odds causes rigidly. The buckling

length decisive for slenderness is shorter than the actual length of the bar. Altogether a
differentiation is made between four types of mountings, each having a different
buckling length.

The influence of diameter in the slenderness ratio is expressed by the inertial radius, i.
it is calculated using the minimum geometrical moment of inertial, I y and the cross-
sectional area, A.

i Iy / A

(equation 2)

The influence of material is taken into consideration by the longitudinal rigidity of the
rod EA. Here, E is the modulus of elasticity of the respective material and A is cross-
sectional area. The influence of various factors on the critical load are summarized in
so-called “Euler Formula”:

EA
Fcrit   2
2

(equation 3)

Or expressed in a different form:

 EI y
Fcrit   2
l2

(equation 4)

In order to determine whether a rod has failed due to exceeding the

admissible compressive strain or by buckling, the normal compressive strain
in the rod, which is part of the critical load must be calculated.
F E
6k  k   2 2
A 
(equation 5)

In this normal compressive strain is lower than the admissible compressive

strain, the rod will fail due to buckling. If the admission compressive strain is
used as the normal compressive strain, the critical slenderness ratio, λcrit at
which buckling occurs can be calculated:
E
crit   2
p

(equation 6)

The buckling force can be determined according to the Euler formula:

EI y
Fcrit   2
l2

(equation 7)

Iy
And moment inertia, is calculated as the following for a square cross
section:
bh 3
Iy 
12

(equation 8)
 X
APPARATUS
iv. WP120 Buckling Test device.
The unit essentially consists of:

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

Figure B: Top specimen holder Figure C: Bottom specimen holder

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

Figure D: Buckling test device in the Lab

PROCEDURES
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 as shown in Figure D.
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 its 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
( Pin – Pin )
S4 → Steel

E = 210 x 109 N/m2

Length = 0.65 m

Width = 0.02 m

Buckling Force, F(N) Experimental Deflection, δ Theoretical Deflection, δ

(mm) (mm)
100 0.000 1.367
150 0.000 2.051
200 0.120 2.735
250 0.120 3.418
300 0.165 4.102
350 0.250 4.786
400 0.325 5.469
450 0.440 6.153
500 0.640 6.837

Average percentage error %

94.393
 Table 3 (Percentage error of pin to pin connection)

Buckling Force, F (N) Deflection, δ (mm) Theoretical Value, Percentage Error, %

v(mm)

0 0 0 0

100 0.225 0.57 60.6

200 0.5025 1.44 65.1

300 1.020 1.72 40.5

400 2.5575 2.29 11.7

GRAPH OF BUCKLING FORCE, F(N) VERSUS DEFLECTION, δ (mm)

0.7

0.6

0.5
Deflection, δ (mm)

0.4

0.3 Deflection, δ (mm)

0.2

0.1

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Buckling Force, F(N)

Length of Rod = 649 mm

Width of Rod = 20.28 mm

Thickness of the Rod = 4.28 mm

Modulus of Elasticity = 210x103 N/mm2
…..

E = 210 x 109 N/m2

Length = 0.65 m

Width = 0.02 m

Thickness= 0.04m

L = 0.649m

b = 0.02028m

h = 0.00428m

l = L × 1 = 0.649m

1 1
𝐼𝑦 = 𝑏ℎ3 = (0.02028)(0.00428)3 = 1.325 × 10−10 𝑚4
12 12

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

1 1
𝐼𝑥 = ℎ𝑏 3 = (0.00428)(0.02028)3 = 2.9749 × 10−9 𝑚4
12 12
1 1 −10 4
𝐼𝑥𝑥𝑜 = 𝑏ℎ3 = (0.02)(0.004)3 = 112.6𝑚𝑚4 = 1.0667 𝑋 10 𝑚
12 12

𝜋 2 𝐸𝐼𝑦 𝜋 2 (210 x 109 )(1.325 × 10−10 )

𝐹𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 = = = 651.9969 𝑁
𝑙2 (0.649)2

𝜋 2 𝐸𝐼𝑦 𝜋 2 (210 x 109 )(2.667𝑋 10−8 )

𝐹𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑜 = = = 130832.41 𝑁
𝑙2 (0.65)2
𝐸𝐼𝑑𝑣 2 𝐹𝑥
=
𝑑𝑥 2 2

𝐸𝐼𝑑𝑣 𝑓𝑥 2
= +𝑐
𝑑𝑥 4

𝑓𝑥 3
𝐸𝐼𝑣 + + 𝑐𝑥 + 𝑐2
12

𝐿 2
𝑑𝑣 𝐿 𝐿 2 𝐹( )
2
𝑑𝑥
=0 𝑥= 2
, 0= 𝐹 (2) +𝐶 𝐶=− 4

𝑋 = 0, 𝑣 = 0

𝑋 = 𝐿, 𝑣 = 0

𝐿 2
1 𝐹𝑥 3 𝐹( ) 𝑋
2
𝑣 = 𝐸𝐼 [ 12 − ]
4

𝐿 3 𝐿 3
𝐹( ) 𝐹( ) 100(0.325)3 100(0.325)3
2 2
= − = − = 0.5721mm
12 4 12 4

0.225
𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 1 − (100) = 60.66%
0.5721

( Pin – Fix )
S6 → Steel

Length of Rod = 674 mm → 674 * (0.7) = 470.8 mm

Width of Rod = 20.19 mm
Modulus of Elasticity = 210x103 N/mm2

Buckling Force, F (N) Deflection, δ (mm) Theoretical Value, Percentage Error, %

v(mm)

0 0 0 0

100 0.130 0.444 70.7

200 0.3775 1.21 68.8

300 0.7375 2.825 73.89

400 1.120 2.734 59.0

GRAPH OF BUCKLING FORCE, F(N) VERSUS DEFLECTION, δ (mm)

1.8
1.6
1.4
Deflection, δ (mm)

1.2
1
0.8
Deflection, δ (mm)
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Buckling Force, F(N)

Σ𝐹𝑦 = 0
𝐴𝑦 + 𝐵𝑦 = 100 𝑁
Σ𝑀 = 0
0.65𝐴𝑦 = 𝑀𝐴 +32.5 …….. eq (1)

Using Macaulay’s Theory

𝑑2 𝑦
𝐸𝐼𝑥 𝑑𝑥 2 = Mx

𝑑2𝑦
𝐸𝐼𝑥 ∫ = 𝐴𝑦 𝑥 − 𝑀𝐴 − 100(𝑥 − 0.325)
𝑑𝑥 2
𝑑𝑦 𝐴𝑦 2 100(𝑥 − 0.325)2
𝐸𝐼𝑥 ∫ = 𝑥 − 𝑀𝐴 𝑥 − + 𝐶1
𝑑𝑥 2 2
𝐴𝑦 3 𝑀𝐴 2 100(𝑥 − 0.325)3
𝐸𝐼𝑥 𝑦 = 𝑥 − 𝑥 − + 𝐶1 𝑥 + 𝐶2
6 2 6
When x = 0 and y = 0
0 = 0 − 0 − 0 + 0 + 𝐶2
𝐶2 = 0

𝑑𝑦
When x = 0 and 𝑑𝑥 = 0

0 = 0 − 0 − 0 + 𝐶1
𝐶1 = 0

When x = 0.65 and y = 0

0 = 0.0457𝐴𝑦 − 0.2113𝑀𝐴 − 0.5721
𝑀𝐴 = 0.2163𝐴𝑦 − 2.7075 EQ 2

From 1 and 2

When MB = 0
0 = 0.65𝐴𝑦 − 0.2246𝐴𝑦 − 22.4703 − 100(0.674 − 0.337)
𝐴𝑦 = 68.697 N

68.7 + 𝐵𝑦 = 100
𝐵𝑦 = 31.3
𝑀𝐴 = 12.15 Nm

When x = 0.325

68.69(0.325)3 12.15(0.325)2 100(0.325 − 0.325)3

EI𝑣 = − −
6 2 6
EI𝑣 = −0.2488

−0.2488
v = (210 x 109)(2.667×10−9 )
v= 0.444 mm
Percentage Error
𝑻𝒉𝒆𝒐𝒓𝒆𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍−𝑬𝒙𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒂𝒍
Percentage of error, (%) = × 100%
𝑻𝒉𝒆𝒐𝒓𝒆𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍

0.444−0.130
Percentage of error, (%) = × 100%
0.444

Percentage of error, (%) = 70.7%

DISCUSSION
In this experiment 2 type of steel were investigated both are S4 and S6. Comparison was taken
between the two rods by determining the percentage of error by finding the deflections of both
steels applied in this experiment. Both agrees with the Euler Theory.

The graph of force vs. deflection for pin-fixed join shows that as the force increases the
deflection increases as well. Initially the graph increases followed by a curve with low gradient.
This shows that when the load increases by 100 N, the initial interval between successive
deflections were small before it got bigger. The experimental value was 0.444 m. The
experimental value gives a high percentage error of 73.89%.

However, the graph of pin-pin joint also shows that deflection increases with the load being
applied. Just like the other joint, the graph at first increases steeply with every 100 N increment
and later increases with a lower gradient which simply means that initial interval of between
successive deflections were small before it got bigger. This gives a very high deviation with
percentage error of 94.393%.

From the data that we have obtained, when two same force values from both the joints are
investigated, it can be seen that the deflection for pin-fixed is lower. For example if we take a
look at 500N of both types of connection the deflection for pin-fixed is 0.410 mm whereas pin-
pin 0.640 mm. This stays true for every single value and thus it can be affirmed that pin-fixed
connection is the safest type when compared to pin-pin.

To improve this experiment, the reading must be taken carefully for each struts cross section
where we can reduce its error by taking several reading and set the indicator to zero. Experiment
must done carefully because during the experiment the force reading meter is too sensitive even
to tiny movement.

CONCLUSION
From this experiment it can be concluded that as the axial force on the column is
increased the deflection or the bend occurring on the structure increase. When two joints are
compared the pin-fixed is safer compared to pin-pin because it has a smaller deflection which
means this type of joint is slightly more better in resisting the bend. The percentage of error due
to the deflections show high percentage, and that explained the inaccurate calculations or the
indicator of the deflection been determined unsuccessfully. The theoretical and experimental
values have deviations due to practical factors and can be improved by taking some precautions.

REFERENCES
1. Allen H.G. and Bulson P. S., 'Background of buckling', McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead,
1980.
2. Timoshenko S. P. and Gere J. M., 'Theory of Elastic Stability', McGraw -hill, New York,
2nd Edition, 1961.
3. Horne M.R. and Merchant W., 'The Stability of Frames', Pergamon, Oxford, 1965.
4. Berham, P.P.,Crawford, R.J,Armstrong.C.G 1996, Mechanism of Engineering Materials,
2nd Edition, PearsonEducation Limited.