Lebanese American University

School of Engineering

Department of Civil Engineering

Byblos Campus

CIE 305 – Stress Analysis LAB

Instructor: Gebran Karam

Spring 2020

Report 4: Column Buckling

Done by: Adham Hassan

ID: 201604307

Date of Submission: 15/07/2020

Table of Contents
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 3
Objective ................................................................................................................................................... 4
Theory of the Experiment ....................................................................................................................... 5
List of Equipments ................................................................................................................................... 9
Experimental Procedure .......................................................................................................................... 9
Data and Results ..................................................................................................................................... 10
Discussion: .............................................................................................................................................. 10
Results ..................................................................................................................................................... 12
Percent Error .......................................................................................................................................... 13
Error Analysis ........................................................................................................................................ 15
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 16
References ............................................................................................................................................... 17
Introduction
As the axial load on a straight slender column with elastic material properties is
increased in magnitude, column passes through three states:
stable equilibrium, neutral equilibrium, and instability. The straight column under load is
in stable equilibrium if an eccentric force, applied on the ends of the column,

produces a small lateral deflection which disappears, and the column returns to its
straight form when the eccentric force is removed. If the column eccentric load is
gradually increased, a condition is reached in which the straight form of
equilibrium becomes so-called neutral equilibrium, and a small lateral force will
produce a deflection that does not disappear and the column remain in this

slightly bent form when the eccentric force is removed. The load at which neutral
equilibrium of a column is reached is called the critical load. The state of instability
is reached when a slight increase of the column load (above the critical load) causes
uncontrollably growing lateral deflections leading to complete collapse.
For an eccentrically loaded straight column with an end support conditions, the

equation of static equilibrium, in the form of a differential equation, can be solved

for the deflected shape and critical load of the column. With, fixed or free end
support conditions the deflected shape in neutral equilibrium of an initially
straight column with uniform cross section throughout its length always follows a partial
or composite sinusoidal curve shape, and the critical load is given by:
Objective
The objective of this experiment is to measure ymax due to eccentricity. Eccentric
loads are dangerous for structures. This is why we study these loads and their
effects on the structures. In this lab we calculated the critical force for the steel
plate using Euler’s equation , then 9 different loads less than the critical load were
place eccentric on the plate to measure the deflection due to each and compare
and interpret the results.
Theory of the Experiment
List of Equipments

 Caliper  Wood support

 Metallic ruler  Weight holders with hooks

 Small weights  Digital Balance

Experimental Procedure

1- Using a caliper, determine the thickness and width of the plate.

2- Attach the plate straightly to the wood support.

3- Determine the effective length of the plate which is the distance from the
support to the load location.

4- Attach to the plate the eccentricity pin.

5- At a same eccentricity “e”, Apply 9 different loads on the plate.

6- Measure using a ruler the eccentricity “e”.

7- Determine the 9 deflections ymax obtained.

8- Measure the final deflection of the plate after removing the loads.
Data and Results
The thickness and width of the plate is 1 mm and 28 mm respectively.

Eccentricity e = 25 mm ; Steel Plate L = 725 mm

Applied Load (g) Ymax (mm)

0 0

Hook (10g) 4

20 9

40 17

60 28

80 46

100 75

120 132

140 270

160 380
Table 1: Data Collected

Discussion:

1) The critical load is given by:

E = Elastic modulus of the material (100 GPA),
I = The minimal moment of inertia of the cross section,
L = Effective Length of the plate from support to load location.
 = 2 (100x103) (1/12)(28)(12) = 1.095 N
(2x725)2
2) The maximum theoretical deflection ymax (exp) is calculated using this formula:

where e = 25 mm and Pcr = 1.095 N = 112 g

Load (P) in g Theoretical ymax in
mm
10 3
20 7
40 17.5
60 35
80 75
100 250
120 -ve
140 -ve
160 -ve
Table 2: Load P vs ymax(theor)
Results

The final position or deflection of the plate after removing the loads is 25 mm
measured experimentally. The plate hence did not return to the initial position
when no loads where applied. This final position or deflection is less than the
deflection when the load of 60 g was applied. Therefore, the plate undergoes a
final deflection or position after all loads are removed different than zero but
proportional to the applied eccentric loads.
The following graph shows that the maximum deflection is directly
proportional to the applied load. As the load increase, the deflection increases
nonlinearly.

Figure 1: ymax(exp) and ymax(theor) vs Load P

 Percent Error
Percentage Error = ymax (theoretical) – ymax (experimental)
ymax (theoretical)

Theoretical ymax in cm Experimental ymax in cm Percentage Error

3 4 33%
7 9 28.5%
17.5 17 2.86%
35 28 20%
75 46 38.6%
250 75 70%
- 132 -
- 270 -
- 380 -
Table 4: Percentage of error between ymax(exp) and ymax(theor)

The percentage of error between ymax (theoretical) and ymax (experimental) is largest
when the load P is closest to the critical load P cr. The percentage of error is also the
lowest when the load (P) applied is smallest and farthest from the critical load.

The relation between the plate length and the deflection ymax is determined from the
equation of ymax theoretical which is in terms of the critical load which in itself is
proportional to the plate length.

From the equation of the critical load, it is clear that the critical load is inversely
proportional to the plate length. (As L increases, the critical From load decreases).
the equation of ymax, it is seen that the critical load Pcr is indirectly
proportional to ymax (As Pcritical increase, y max decrease). Hence, the increase in
plate length is directly proportional to the plate length. (As the plate length
increase, ymax increase and vice versa.) However this change is not linear, hence

ymax would not have exactly the same change.

Error Analysis
After the test is done, a comparison of results is studied so we are able to conclude a
general theory for each case in addition to an analysis of the errors that had occurred
during the experiment. The experiment performed may be conducted with many
sources of errors such as the following:

❖ The thickness and width of the plate was not measured correctly when using the
calliper hence altering the value of the moment of inertia.

❖ The plate attached to the wood support was not completely straight initially.

❖ The effective length and eccentricity was not measured efficiently using the
ruler.

❖ The measurement of the four deflections ymax(exp) was not determined efficiently
from the original position.
Conclusion
The eccentricity of the load, or an initial curvature, subjects the column to immediate
bending. The increased stresses due to the combined axial-plus-flexural stresses
result in a reduced load-carrying ability. In case of eccentrically loaded steel plate
with fixed-free end conditions, it is concluded after conducting the experiment that
the deflection is directly proportional to the eccentric load applied. As the load
increase, the deflection increase. The maximum deflection determined
experimentally is compared to the theoretical maximum deflection which is
determined from the ymax formula. The analysis of the difference in deflection values
allow us to conclude that as the applied load is closer to the critical load, the
percentage error increase while if the applied load is lowest and farthest from the
critical load, the percentage error is the lowest.

Moreover, it is concluded that the plate length is directly proportional to the

maximum deflection; as the plate length increase, the maximum deflection increase.
In addition, the plate takes a final position or deflection when the loads are removed
and does not go back to its initial vertically straight position.
References

❖ Mechanics of Materials, 5th Edition.

❖ Young W.C Budynas - R.G. Roarks Formulas for Stress and Strain, 7th edition.

❖ http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com.