This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
by
Lin Shaodun Student ID: A0066078X Sub Group: Lab 2B Date: 19th Mar 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
OBJECTIVES
1
INTRODUCTION
1
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
2
SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
3
RESULTS (TABLES & GRAPHS)
7
DISCUSSION
11
CONCLUSION
15
1
OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this experiment are: To practice using strain gauge rosette and strain meter to measure strain of aluminum cantilever beam under a point load at its free end. To study the static behavior of aluminum cantilever beam subjects to bending moment. To have a better understanding on two dimensional strain transformation equations.
INTRODUCTION DESCRIPTION OF EQUIPMENT.
(1) Strain Measurement Equipment. A commonly used instrument for strain measurement is a strain meter and its circuit is based on the principle of a Wheatstone bridge. For most applications strain gauges are connected using the quarter bridge configuration. This bridge arrangement contains one active strain gauge in the circuit as shown in Fig. 1. The meter readings record the strain of one active gauge. Strain gauges can also be connected using the half bridge configuration. This bridge arrangement contains two active gauges in the circuit as shown in Fig. 2. The meter readings in this case record the total strains of two active gauges. The half bridge configuration is often used in the measurement of bending strain.
R M R PR Active Gauge M R Active Gauge P
Active Gauge
R
P+
P+
Fig 1: Quarter Bridge Configuration
Fig 2: Half Bridge Configuration
(2) Strain Indicator (Fig 3) and Balancing Unit (Fig 4)
Fig 3: Strain Indicator
Fig 4: Balancing Unit (use Channel 10 only)
2
(3) Cantilever Test Rig (Fig 5) and Strain Gauge Locations (Fig 6)
Strain Gauge Rosette
Cantilever Test Rig
Dial Indicator (0.01mm)
Aluminum Test Specimen
Weights (0.25 Kg x 6)
Strain Gauge A
Fig 5: Cantilever Test Rig
Fig 6: Strain Gauge Locations
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
1. The given average dimensions of the Aluminum beam as follow: Width (b) = 25.60mm, Thickness (t) = 6.06mm and Length (L) = 0.300m. 2. Zero the dial indicator before measurement of end deflection YL. Connect the strain gauges which measuring the surface strains at locations A (Fig 7) to SB10 Balancing Unit channel 10 using quarter bridge configuration. Adjust the channel 10 VR until the Strain indicator reading is zero.
Fig 7: Strain Gauge Locations
3
3. Load the weight onto the hanger at the end of aluminum beam with 0.25Kg increment, record the deflection YL and the strain readings A at each stage, until the total weight reaches 1.50Kg. 4. Unload the weight at 0.25Kg decrement, record the corresponding beam deflection YL and the strain gauge reading A during unloading. 5. Repeat above steps 3~5 for strain gauge e , f, and g (Fig 7), record the strain gauge reading for each loading and unloading stages. 6. Connect the strain gauges measuring the surface axial strain at locations A and B (Fig 7) to the strain meter using halfbridge configuration. Load and unload the beam and at 0.25 increment following similar steps as above described and record the strain reading AB.
SAMPLE CALCULATIONS A) CALCULATION OF THEORETICAL STRAIN AT POINT A, A

B) CALCULATION OF THEORETICAL DEFLECTION OF BEAM Y L

C) CALCULATION OF PRINCIPAL STRAIN 1 AND 2
[( [ [( [
)
(
) ]
⁄
] ) ( ) ]
⁄
⁄
]
⁄
4
RESULTS (TABLES & GR APHS) A. TABLES
P in Kg 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50
YL (mm) Loading Unloading 0.68 1.37 2.10 2.81 3.53 4.27 0.70 1.44 2.18 2.86 3.57 Average 0.69 1.41 2.14 2.84 3.55 4.27 Loading 33 66 99 135 169 202 Unloading 33 68 102 135 170 Average 33 67.5 100.5 135 169.5 202
Theoretical Strain 33.5 67.1 100.6 134.2 167.7 201.2
P in Kg Loading Unloading 48 48 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 P in Kg 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 95 147 195 245 295 99 149 199 247
Average
Loading
Unloading
Average
Loading
Unloading
Average 13.5 30.5 46.5 62 77.5
48 97 148 197 246 295
19 38 56 74 92 113
18 37 56 75 92
18.5 37.5 56 74.5 92 113
13 30 46 61 77 93
14 31 47 63 78
93
Loading 64 132 200 266 336 402
Unloading 68 138 206 270 339
Average 66 135 203 268 337 402 48.0 97.1 148.1 197.2 246.2 295.4
5
B. GRAPHS
i.
P against YL
ii.
P against A
iii.
P against AB
6
iv.
P against e
v.
P against 1
b) Fit the best straight line through the above experimental results and obtain the slope for each line. i. Slope for the P against YL = 0.3497 Kg/mm ii. Slope for the P against A = 0.0074 Kg/µStrain iii. Slope for the P against AB = 0.0037 Kg/µStrain iv. Slope for the P against e = 0.0051 Kg/µStrain v. Slope for the P against 1= 0.0050 Kg/µStrain
7
c) From the graph of a(i) and Eq. (1), compute the Young's modulus of the material.
DISCUSSION
d) Obtain the ratio of the slopes of a(ii) and a(iii) for the beam. Comment on the values obtained. From the above graph: Slope for the P against A = 0.0074 Kg/µStrain Slope for the P against AB = 0.0037 Kg/µStrain The ratio of both graphs is 1:2. This shows that the half bridge configuration output is twice of the quarter bridge configuration. This is obvious as in a quarterbridge configuration, transducer A located at the top of the beam is measuring the tension strain of the beam, while in a halfbridge configuration, the strain output is the sum of A and B hence the strain shows in the meter is twice of A.
e) Plot the theoretical P vs. A on the same graph as a(ii) and comment on the results.
8
From the above graph we can see the two trend lines are almost the same. This shows that the experimental data are very close to theoretical data. The slight variations are due to experimental errors like: Instable strain meter The weight of the hanger at the end of beam is not considered. Strain gauge mounting position tolerance, etc. Also, when calculating the theoretical values, we assume the Young’s Modulus is 70Gpa, this might not be the exact property of the test specimen. f) Compare the slopes of a(iv) and a(v) and comment on the results. From the above graph: Slope for the P against e = 0.0051 Kg/µStrain Slope for the P against 1 = 0.0050 Kg/µStrain Slope of Graph (iv) and Graph (v) are almost the same. This means the maximum principle strain value and direction is the same as the normal strain at 0°direction when the beam is subjected pure bending stress. The slight different might due to the strain gauge rosette was not mounted at exact0°direction or other measurement error. g) Have you used the values of A, e , f and g for unloading in your calculations? Why? Yes, we take values of A, e , f and g during unloading of each load P. It is important to make the experiment result more accurate as we can double confirm the material is loaded within elastic limit, when the material is applied load under elastic limit, the stressstrain curve will be linear, which means the loading curve should be the same as unloading curve in theory. By taking the average values of the strain of both loading and unloading, we can minimize the measurement errors as well.
CONCLUSION
All the objectives of this experiment is achieved, the experimental data is very close to theoretical data. I have familiarized the use of the strain meter and the quarter and half bridge configurations. I also have better understanding of behavior of cantilever beam subjects to pure bending stress.
9
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.