You are on page 1of 11

Unsymmetrical Bending

Charles Seviour 0673045 05/2/08

Summary: The principle axis of an L beam was found experimentally and theoretically and the results were found to accuracy of 7.3%.

Contents Introduction 2. Apparatus 3. Experiment 4. Theory 4.1Assumptions 4.2 Unsymmetrical Bending Equations 4.2.1Solid edge calculation 5. Results 6. Analysis 6.1Theoretical Error 6.2Empirical error 6.3Accuracy 7. Discussion 8. Conclusions 9. Appendix 9.1 Sample number crunching 9.2 Dimension 9.3 Data
1.

page 2 2 3 3 3 4 6 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 9

1. Introduction
The resulting deflection on a cantilever L beam for different orientations around the longitudinal axis were found.

2. Apparatus
This experiment consisted of the following items, some are depicted on the next page (Figures 1 and 2). A built in end with bearing Protractor mounted on the bearing end 1 Kg weight 2 magnetic clock gauges one on the horizontal and one on the vertical plane L beam Clock gauges Micrometer

Figure 1 (left) Figure 2 (below)

Weight L beam

Clock gauges

3. Experiment
The L beam was set to an initial angle of zero. The micrometer was used to measure the dimensions used for the theoretical calculations. These were taken three times along the length and the average value used. The 1 Kg weight was applied and the resulting deflections measured on the clock gauges were recorded. The beam was then rotated 10 degrees and the corresponding deflections were recorded. This was repeated through 180 degrees. The results were graphed and the principle angle was determined.

4. Theory
4.1 Assumptions
The following assumptions apply to unsymmetrical bending theory of an L beam. Assumption 1 The loads small enough are such that there is no significant axial or torsional deformation. Assumption 2 Squashing action is significantly smaller then bending action. 4

Assumption 3 Plane sections before deformation remain plane after deformation. Assumption 4 Plane perpendicular to the axis remain nearly perpendicular after deformation. Assumption 5 Strains are small. Assumption 6 Material is isotropic Assumption 7 Material is elastic. Assumption 9 There are no inelastic strain. Assumption 10 The material is homogenous across the cross-section. Assumption 11 The average dimensions accurately approximate to those of an equivalent ideal beam. Assumption 1-10 are courtesy of: http://www.me.mtu.edu/~mavable/MEEM4150/Slides/Chapter6.pdf These assumptions mean that the theoretical beam only deflects smoothly and in the directions predicted by the theory. These assumptions are reviewed in the discussion section.

4.2 Unsymmetrical Bending Equations


The principle axis is where the neutral axis coincides with the axis of the moment being applied. The principle axis for the x and y component has been calculated as follows. In equations the subscripts refer to the axis and member. e.g. I y 2 refers to the y axis 2nd member. Otherwise nomenclature is as per notes. The following approach was undertaken to calculate the principle axis. Centriods Second moments of area Principle axis equation 6.53 10 1 62.70 X

! 11wdf1

.
Y

C Y 2 . 44.13 12 6.41

Figure 3 Centroid:
A1 = 6.53 62 .7 = 409 .4 A2 =44.13 6.41=282.9

X = Y =

A1 x1 + A2 x 2 = 12 .28 A1 + A2

A1 y1 + A2 y 2 =19.84 A1 + A2 Second moments of area:

For a rectangle I around the centre is I =

bd 3 . 12

Using parallel axis theorem the I for each rectangle is found and added. The results are tabulated below (Figure 4).
I x1 = I x2 = I xx = I x1 + I x 2
I y2 I y1 I yy = I y1 + I y 2

16 177

839 373 855 550

124

55 692 179 883

I xy = xyA

I x1 y1

I x2 y2

I xy

42 480

46 048

117 638 186

Figure 4 Principle axis equation


tan 2 =
2 = tan

2 I xy I xx + I yy
1

(227.2)

=90/2=45
=180+45=225 Neutral axis
I uu = 117 518 204 I vv =-116482

tan =

I uu tan =-163 I vv

=90 degrees

4.2.1Solid edge calculation

Figure 5 An illustration of the L beam in the position of the neutral axis. This was prompted by the negative value for the I vv which doesnt make sense. An L beam of the correct geometry was formed. Solid edge calculated the physical properties and then these were used to give the angle of the neutral axis.

Figure 6 Property table X coordinate 0.53 Y coordinate 0.84


XY = tan
1

(53 / 84 ) = 32.2 degrees

tan =

I uu tan =0.723 I vv

=36degrees

5. Results
Figure 7 shows the experimental results. The table of results is included in section 9.3 Data.
L beam Deflections 5

0 -50 x Deflection (0.01mm) -5 x Deflection y Deflection 0 50 100 150 200

-10

-15

-20

-25

Figure 7 L beam deflections graph

Rotation (degrees)

6. Analysis
6.1Theoretical Error
The theoretical error in calculating the neutral axis was due to the measured geometry error. The dimensions were measured to a precision of 0.005mm with a micrometer. These errors should be combined according to standard derivative error treatment. The theoretical error was not calculated but qualified in the discussion section

6.2Empirical error
The empirical error for deflection (0.005mm) was due to the level of precision of the clock gauges. Rotation was measured with a protractor of 0.5 degrees precision. The empirical error was included for the graph (Figure 4). This had the limited use of being able to visually show the magnitude of the errors. To make it more useful theoretical defection would also have be plotted. It is possible to deduce that the

theoretical value for the principle axis of 36 degrees coincides (within empirical error margins) with the actual value of 30 degrees.

6.3Accuracy
The Accuracy was given by:
Accuracy = (1 theory 32 .2 ) = (1 ) = 0.073 Actual 30

This is a reasonable accuracy of 7.3% (the minus sign is irrelevant).

7. Discussion
The experiment was reasonably accurate (<10% discrepancy between theory and actual). The both of the graphs are clearly sinusoidal; however in particular, the y deflection graph shows some spurious results. In order to identify the rogue values, best fitting sine curves should be superimposed. Unfortunately the Excel software doesnt have this function. Alternatively, the moment applied by the weight could be calculated (after measuring the length of the beam) and the theoretical defection computed. This could then be graphed and compared. Some of the errors are likely to be human. This could be reduced by repeated experiments. The assumptions 6, 10 and 11 are slightly dubious. This is because the beam is old. Over the years it has been corroded and possibly permanently deformed somewhat. All the assumptions that rely on the fact that the deflection is insignificant should be valid since the maximum deflection is 3 orders of magnitude less according to a back of the envelope calculation. Unfortunately a mistake that can be traced back to the calculation of the x centriod caused the angle of the principle axis to differ between the two methods. It is unclear why the calculated value is the wrong value of 12 compared to a 14 given by solid edge. This small difference was multiplied throughout the calculations resulting in a 54 degree difference. This illustrates the sensitivity of the experiment to errors. All the theoretical errors have not been quantified; this acts as a useful qualifier.

8. Conclusion
This experiment proved that the simple theory of unsymmetrical bending is valid (accuracy of 7.3%). The results are within experimental error bounds. The experiment could be as mentioned in the discussion.

9. Appendix 9.1 Sample number crunching


Average: (62.63 + 62.91 + 62.55) / 3 = 62.6966667 Centroid: (((409.4 * 62.7) / 2) + (282.9 * (6.41 / 2))) / 692.3 = 19.848887 (409.4 + (6.53 / 2) + (282.9 * (6.53 + (44.13 / 2)))) / 692.3 = 12.2810783
I x2 y2 :

282.9 * ((44.13 / 2) - 12.28) * (19.84 - (6.41 / 2)) = 46 048.6161


2 I xy I xx + I yy

tan 2 =

((-2) * 117 638 186) / (855 550 + 179 883) = -227.225105


I uu = sqrt((((855 550 - 179 883) / 2)^2) + (1.17E8^2)) + 517 716 = 117 518 204

tan =

I uu tan (11 751 804 / (-116 482)) tan(45) = -163.418215 I vv

9.1.1Solid edge
tan = I uu 453 tan = tan( 180 + 32 .2) = 0.72degrees I vv 455

=36degrees

9.2 Dimensions
1 2 3 Fx 50.81 50.49 50.67 Fy 62.63 62.91 62.55 t1 6.56 6.22 6.45 t2 6.50 6.49 6.59

9.3 Data
Rotation 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 x -4.1 -2 -1 0 0.9 1.7 3 2.8 3 2.5 1.8 0.8 -0.4 -1.9 -2.9 -3.2 -4.3 -3.8 y -15.5 -13 -11.1 -11.1 -10.8 -12.5 -13.3 -14.2 -17.1 -18 -19.1 -18.9 -19.9 -18.1 -17.9 -16.1 -15 -13.9 x relative error -0.00122 -0.0025 -0.005 0 0.005556 0.002941 0.001667 0.001786 0.001667 0.002 0.002778 0.00625 -0.0125 -0.00263 -0.00172 -0.00156 -0.00116 -0.00132 y relative error 0.00032 0.00038 0.00045 0.00045 0.00046 -0.0004 0.00038 0.00035 0.00029 0.00028 0.00026 0.00026 0.00025 0.00028 0.00028 0.00031 0.00033 rotation relative error 0 0.05 0.025 0.016667 0.0125 0.01 0.008333 0.007143 0.00625 0.005556 0.005 0.004545 0.004167 0.003846 0.003571 0.003333 0.003125 0.002941 x absolute error 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 y absolute error 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 rotation abs error 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

10

180

-3.9

-12.09

-0.00128

0.00036 0.00041

0.002778

0.005

0.005

0.5

11