ME1100 Mechanics of Materials - I

Calculation Report
Semester: 2

Bending of beams

Index No. Name Practical Group

190121F Senarathna TDSS G2-5

Date of submission 16/12/2021

Due date of submission 17/12/2021

Ashan Weeraratne
Instructed By:

Department of Mechanical Engineering

University of Moratuwa
Sri Lanka
 Contents
1. Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………. 2
2. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………. 3
3. Theory …………………………………………………………………………………. 4
4. Equipment …………………………………………………………………………………. 5
5. Procedure …………………………………………………………………………………. 6
6. Calculations…………………………………………………………………………………. 7
7. Discussion ………………………………………………………………………………….17
8. Conclusion.………………………………………………………………………………….18

1
Abstract
A beam is a structural element that primarily resists loads applied laterally to the beam's axis.
Its mode of deflection is primarily by bending. In this experiment, a simply supported Aluminum beam is
used and the variations of deflection of a simply supported beam with load and beam configuration are
observed. The experiment was conducted in a weight range of 150 - 1250 g . C beam configuration & inverted
U beam configuration were used. At the end of the experiment, interesting trends between deflection of the
beam with weights applied and configurations of the beam are observed.

2
Introduction
In Structural Engineering terms, a beam is a member that can be comprised of several materials to
withstand loads, typically applied laterally to the beam axis. The cross-section of a beam is much smaller
compared to its length. According to the setup, we can categorize beams into different types such as simply
supported beams, cantilever beams, overhanging beams, continuous beams, fixed beams, etc. And according
to the cross-section, we can categorize beams as I beams, T beams, etc. In this experiment, we are concerned
about simply supported beams. Deflection of a simply supported beam depends on the length between
supports, applied load, point of load application, Young’s modulus of beam material, and second moment of
area of the beam’s cross-section.

3
Theory

Figure 1 - Beam under zero load

Figure 2 - Beam under load

The following standard fundamental formula is used to calculate the deflection of the beam based
on its curvature.
1 𝑀 𝑑 2 𝑦(𝑥)
= = −
𝑅 𝐸𝐼 𝑑𝑥 2
Where,
R – The radius of curvature of the neutral surface of the beam at a distance x from the origin
M – The bending moment at the section, distance x from the origin
E – The Young’s modulus o the beam
I – The second moment of area of the cross-section of the beam
y(x) – The vertical deflection at the section distance x from the origin
By integrating above formula twice with respect to x gives an equation for vertical deflection as
follows,

−𝑤𝑥 2 (𝐿2 −2𝑥 2 )

y(x) =
6𝐸𝐼𝐿

4
Equipment
• Beam bending apparatus
• Weights
• Hanger
• Dial gauge
• Vernier caliper
• Meter ruler
• Beam

5
Procedure

Figure 3 - Bending apparatus set up

Figure 4 - Beam cross-section configurations

• Dimensions of the provided beam were measured using a vernier caliper.

• Apparatus was set up as shown in figure 3.
• A thread was attached to the midpoint of the length of the beam between the supports.
• Then the hanger was attached to the end of the thread. The weight of the hanger was
known.
• The dial gauge was set to the midpoint of the length of the beam between the supports using
a clamp and calibration was done by setting the dial to zero.
• Then weights were carefully added to the hanger and the corresponding readings on the dial
were taken. (Before adding weights, make sure to bring the dial gauge to zero to reduce
errors of readings)
• After that, weights were removed from the hanger step by step and the corresponding
readings on the dial were taken. (Before removing weights, make sure to bring the dial
gauge to zero to reduce errors of readings)
• Take loading and unloading readings were taken as mentioned above for both the beam
configurations shown in figure 4.
• Length between the supports was measured using a meter ruler.

6
Calculations

-Second moment of area of the beam’s cross section – C configuration (Icc)

b = 9.5 mm
h = 9.5 mm
t = 0.76 mm

1
Icc = 12 [(9.54) - (8.74 x 7.983)] mm4 = 308.64 mm4

-Second moment of area of the beam’s cross section – Inverted U configuration (Iuu)

b = 9.5 mm
h = 9.5 mm
t = 0.76 mm
YG

9.5 8.74
YG = [(9.5 x 9.5 x ) - (8.74 x 7.98 x )] / [(9.5 x 9.5) - (8.74 x 7.98)] = 6.043 mm
2 2

Iuu = { [9.5 ] + [9.5 x 9.5 x (6.043 - ) ] - [7.98 x 8.43 ] - [8.74 x 7.98 x (6.043 - ) ]}mm
1
12
4 9.5 2
2
1
12
3 8.4 2
2
4

Iuu = 190.46 mm4

-Shown below is a sample calculation for the theoretical beam deflection of C configuration for 750g
weight.
−𝑤𝑥 2 (𝐿2 −2𝑥 2 )
y(x) = (Negative sign indicates that the deflection is downwards)
6𝐸𝐼𝐿

x = 0.4 m
L = 0.8 m
w = 0.75 kg
g = 9.81 ms-2
E = 6.9 x 1010 Nm-2
Icc = 308.64 x 10-12 m4
y(0.4) = 3.6852 mm

7
-Similarly, we can calculate theoretical beam deflection of C configuration for other weights as shown below.
Weight (g) Theoretical beam
deflection (mm)
150 0.7371
250 1.2284
350 1.7198
450 2.2112
550 2.7025
650 3.1939
750 3.6852
850 4.1766
950 4.6679
1050 5.1593
1150 5.6506
1250 6.142
-Shown below is a sample calculation for the theoretical beam deflection of inverted U configuration for
750g weight.
−𝑤𝑥 2 (𝐿2 −2𝑥 2 )
y(x) = (Negative sign indicates that the deflection is downwards)
6𝐸𝐼𝐿

x = 0.4 m
L = 0.8 m
w = 0.75 kg
g = 9.81 ms-2
E = 6.9 x 1010 Nm-2
Iuu = 190.46 x 10-12 m4
y(0.4) = 5.9719 mm

-Similarly, we can calculate theoretical beam deflection of inverted U configuration for other weights as
shown below.
Weight (g) Theoretical beam
deflection (mm)
150 1.1944
250 1.9907
350 2.7869
450 3.5831
550 4.3794
650 5.1756
750 5.9719
850 6.7681
950 7.5643
1050 8.3606
1150 9.1568
1250 9.9531

8
-Shown below is the data set corresponding to graph 1.
Weight (g) Average deflection of beam
- C configuration (mm)
150 1.090
250 1.660
350 2.170
450 2.750
550 3.330
650 3.935
750 4.475
850 5.060
950 5.645
1050 6.070
1150 6.780
1250 7.140

9
 Graph 1
8

6
Deflection of beam - C configuration (mm)

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Weight (g)

10
-Shown below is the data set corresponding to graph 2.
Weight (g) Average deflection of beam –
inverted U configuration (mm)
150 0.395
250 0.685
350 1.055
450 1.450
550 1.800
650 2.100
750 2.435
850 2.790
950 3.140
1050 3.480
1150 3.805
1250 4.130

11
 Graph 2
4.5

3.5

3
Deflection of beam – inverted U configuration (mm)

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Weight (g)

12
-Comparison of practical and theoretical results for C configuration beam. Shown below is the data set
corresponding to graph 3.
Weight (g) Average deflection of Theoretical deflection of
beam - C configuration beam - C configuration
(mm) (mm)
150 1.090 0.7371
250 1.660 1.2284
350 2.170 1.7198
450 2.750 2.2112
550 3.330 2.7025
650 3.935 3.1939
750 4.475 3.6852
850 5.060 4.1766
950 5.645 4.6679
1050 6.070 5.1593
1150 6.780 5.6506
1250 7.140 6.142

13
 Graph 3

6
Deflection of beam - C configuration (mm)

Practical results
4
Theoritical results
Linear (Practical results)
Linear (Theoritical results)

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Weight (g)

14
-Comparison of practical and theoretical results for inverted U configuration beam. Shown below is the data
set corresponding to graph 4.
Weight (g) Average deflection of Theoretical deflection of
beam - inverted U beam - inverted U
configuration (mm) configuration (mm)
150 0.395 1.1944
250 0.685 1.9907
350 1.055 2.7869
450 1.450 3.5831
550 1.800 4.3794
650 2.100 5.1756
750 2.435 5.9719
850 2.790 6.7681
950 3.140 7.5643
1050 3.480 8.3606
1150 3.805 9.1568
1250 4.130 9.9531

15
 Graph 4
12

10

8
Deflection of beam – inverted U configuration (mm)

practical
6
theory
Linear (practical)
Linear (theory)

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Weight (g)

16
Discussion
The theoretical value and practically obtained value of the gradient of the graphs are different. This is due to
errors that occurred while performing this practical. Almost all the errors have been captured and listed
below.
• After loading and unloading weights, the hanging weight set will undergo rotational motions as well
as simple harmonic motions causing to change the tension of the thread to change. Since the dial
gauge is very sensitive, it will sense these very small changes of deflection due to such small
variations of applied weight.
• Before loading and unloading weights, the dial gauge should be set to zero. Otherwise, if we
continue taking readings without getting it back to zero in every step, errors in each step will add up
and result in highly inaccurate readings.
• When loading and unloading weights, there are impacts loads due to hand interference and impulsive
forces between weights. Since the dial gauge is very sensitive, it will sense these very small changes
of deflection due to such small impact loads.
• Average of loading and unloading readings were taken to compensate for the hysteresis effect.
• The weights of the weight set used may not be equal to the labeled value. Such small things will also
make errors in the readings.
• Weight of the beam is neglected in this practical. But it is not negligible. The weight of the beam will
also cause a certain amount of deflection.
• Cross-section of the beam may not beam uniform throughout the length. Therefore, the moment of
inertia will deviate from the calculated value.
• There may be leveling errors of the beam bending apparatus which will lead to include errors in the
obtained readings.
• The readings which are taken from the dial gauge is only accurate to two decimal places of
millimeters. But if we can achieve further accuracy (deeper into decimal places), the results of the
practical can be taken into a higher quality.
• We use a vernier caliper to measure height, width, length and thickness of the beam. Before
measuring we must look for the zero error of the vernier caliper provided and make them into
account when measuring.

17
Conclusion
By observing the graphs, it is concluded that the weight applied, and deflection of the beam has a
linear relationship between them. The second moment of area of beam’s cross-section of inverted U
configuration is lesser than that of C configuration. By comparing the practical values obtained, we can
conclude that the deflection of beam is inversely proportional to the second moment of area of second
moment of area of beam’s cross section. By the comparison between practical and theoretical results, we can
conclude that while doing the experiment there was so much errors as explained in discussion section above.

18