UNIVERSITI TUN HUSSEIN ONN MALAYSIA

Centre for Diploma Studies

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

STRUCTURE ANALYSIS LABORATORY

LAPORAN MAKMAL
LABORATORY REPORT

Kod & Nama Kursus

DAC 21703 ANALISIS STRUKTUR
Course Name & Code
Tajuk Ujikaji
TENSION COEFFICIENT MEMBER N0. 2
Title of Experiment
Seksyen
6
Section
Kumpulan
6
Group
Nama Pensyarah/Pengajar
ENCIK MOHD JAHAYA BIN KESOT
Lecturer/Instructor’s Name
Nama Ketua Kumpulan No. Matrik AA201107
MUHAMMAD AFIQ FAWWAZ
Name of Group Leader Matric No.
BIN FAHMIZAM

Ahli Kumpulan No. Matrik Penilaian (%)

Group Members Matric No. Assessment (%)
Teori, Objektif & Prosedur
1. AHMAD SYAZWAN BIN AA200686 Theory, Objectives 10
JEFRI & Procedure
Ujikaji & Perisisan
2. NUR ALIA SYAKIRAH AA200807 Experiment & Software 15
BINTI ZULKEFLI
Data & Analisis
3. 25
Data & Analysis
Perbincangan
4. 25
Discussion
Kesimpulan &
5. Cadangan Conclusion & 15
Recommendation
Penyertaan
6. 5
Participation
Tarikh Ujikaji Rujukan
Date of Experiment 16 NOVEMBER 2021 References 5
Tarikh Hantar JUMLAH
Date of Submission 13 JANUARY 2022 TOTAL 100

ULASAN PEMERIKSA/COMMENTS
COP DITERIMA/RECEIVED STAMP
 Test Title: TENSION COEFFICIENT MEMBER
Lab Report Rubric (Assessment Form) DAC 21703 – STRUCTURE ANALISIS
N0. 1&2
Criteria 1 2 3 4 5 SCR WT TSCR (%)
Theory,  Theory and other information  Theory and other information  Theory and other information  Theory and other information  Theory and other information
objective, regarding the laboratory is not regarding the laboratory is regarding the laboratory is partly regarding the laboratory is regarding the laboratory is well 2
procedure presented presented minimally presented presented with some mistakes presented
(10%)
Experiment  Details in software was not  Details in software was  Details in software was  Details in software was  Details in software was presented
&Software represented minimally presented presented somewhat accurate presented accurately and accurately and relevant to result. 3
(15%) relevant with minor mistakes

Data & Analysis  Data was not presented  Data lacks precision  Good representation of the  Accurate representation of the  Accurate representation of the data
(25%)  Trends / patterns are not  Trends / patterns are not data using tables and/or data using tables and/or using tables and/or graphs
analyzed analyzed graphs graphs  Trends / patterns are logically
 Analysis is not relevant  Analysis is inconsistent  Trends / patterns are logically  Trends / patterns are logically analyzed
analyzed for the most part analyzed  Questions are answered thoroughly 5
 Questions are answered in  Questions are answered in and in complete sentences
complete sentences complete sentences  Analysis is insightful
 Analysis is general  Analysis is thoughtful
Discussion  No discussion was included or A statement of the results is  A statement of the results of the  Accurate statement of the  Accurate statement of the results of lab
(25%) shows little effort and reflection on incomplete with little reflection lab indicates whether results results of the lab indicates indicates whether results support
the lab on the lab support the hypothesis whether results support the hypothesis
hypothesis  Possible sources of error and what 5
 Possible sources of error was learned from the lab discussed
identified
Conclusion &  Conclusion & recommendation  Conclusion & recommendation  Conclusion & recommendation  Conclusion & recommendation  Conclusion & recommendation was
Recommendation was not presented was minimally presented was presented somewhat accurate was presented accurately and presented accurately and relevant to
(15%) and relevant to result obtain from relevant to result obtain from the result obtain from the laboratory work 3
the laboratory work laboratory work with minor
mistakes
Participation  Student was hostile about  Participation was minimal  Did the job but did not appear to  Used time pretty well. Stayed  Showed interest, used time very well,
(during participating be very interested. Focus lost on focused on the experiment most of guide other students and very focused on
experiment) several occasion the time experiment 1
(5%)
Reference  Reference was not presented in the  Reference was minimally  Reference was partly presented  Reference was presented in  Reference was presented in proper
(5%) report presented in the report in somewhat proper format and proper format and relevant to the format and relevant to the laboratory
relevant to the laboratory work laboratory work with some work 1
minor mistakes

NAME OF LECTURER : SIGNATURE : DATE : TOTAL SCORE : / 100

Note : SCR = SCORE, WT = WEIGHTAGE, TSCR = TOTAL SCORE

 STUDENT CODE OF ETHIC
(SCE)

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

CENTRE OF DIPLOMA STUDIES

I, hereby confess that I have prepared this report on my own effort. I also admit not to
receive or give any help during the preparation of this report and pledge
that everything mentioned in the report is true.

AFIQ

Student Signature

Name : MUHAMMAD AFIQ FAWWAZ BIN FAHMIZAM

Matric No. : AA201107

Date : 16 JANUARY 2022

TENSION COEFFICIENT MEMBER NO. 1&2 LAB REPORT

1.0 OBJECTIVE

1.1 To compare the theoretical value of forces in a determinate space truss to the simulated value.

2.0 THEORY

The tension coefficient for a frame member is calculated by dividing the draw or tension in that
T
member by its length; t  . Where t is the member's tension coefficient, T is the member's

pull,
L
and L is the member's length. A space frame truss is described as a component of a truss system
that is not located in a 2D plane. To put it another way, space truss contains components on all
three axes: x, y, and z. Consider the node A (xA, yA) and B (xB, yB) of a member.

Assume the force in the member in TAB is tension (+ve), the definition of tension coefficient, t
TAB
is; t 
AB
L AB

At A, the horizontal component TAB is;

TAB cos  t ABLAB cos  t LAB x  xA 

LAB
AB B
 t AB x B  x A

Using the same method, the vertical component at A is  t AB  y B  y A 

At B, the horizontal component TAB is =  tAB xA  xB 

Using the same method, the vertical component at B is
 t AB  y A  yB 
Using static equation and the coordinate value, tension at each joint can be solve.

TAB  t AB L AB   BA x 2  BA
y 2
x y
Space frames are often used to create large spans with minimal supports and spans in several directions.
They are reinforced by the inherent rigidity of the triangular frame; bending moments (flexing loads) are
transmitted as tension and compression loads down the length of each strut.
 3.0 PROCEDURE

1. The experiment apparatus's components were identified.

2. Experiment design:

 The jib's length was modified by rotating male threaded rods clockwise or anticlockwise, depending on
whether the length needed to be increased or decreased.

 The tie's length was changed using a stainless steel chain and turnbuckle.

 The post length was adjusted and measured from the pivot joint using post adjustment.

 Initial tie rod and jib unloading data were taken.

 The weight was secured to the hanger, and the force readings on the jib and tie were recorded, along with
their relative lengths.

 Each part's experimental forces and lengths were recorded.

3. The setup assembly of the experiment was modelled into Staad Pro in 3 dimensions.
4. Staad Pro set-up:

Step 1: As nearly as feasible, the geometry of the equipment was reproduced

in Staad Pro. We picked an axis system and an origin for the axes. The
directions x, y, and z have been assumed to be positive. All joints' starting
positions (coordinates) were calculated. The initial dimensions of the ties and
jib were calculated (length, measured from the pivot joint).

Step 2: Additional model characteristics such as joint type, support type,

material qualities, and other pertinent information were imported into Staad
Pro.

Step 3: The loading data for the Staad Pro was imputed and an analysis
method was executed. Significant value was extracted from the output data.

5.The magnitudes of all members forces and support reaction were manually
estimated using the TENSION COEFFICIENT METHOD, utilising the
identical setup geometry and specification.
 4.0 RESULT

OBSERVATION TABLE:
No. 2 Tension Coefficient Member

Weight Initial Length (mm) Final Length (mm) Initial Forces (N) Final Force (N)
(N)
Tie Jib Post Tie Jib Tie Jib Tie Jib

A B. A B A B A B

150 380 380 545 225 430 430 510 5 5 1.5 100 100 60

1 kg = 10 N

1. Identify the coordinates Let Point c be origin

No. 1 Tension Coefficient Member

A (0,460,0)

B (400,460,0)

C (200,460,323)

D (200,0,0)
 1. Present the obtained result in the appropriate table.

Members Lx(mm) Ly(mm) Lz (mm) L t T (N) Result

CA 200 0 323 379.91 −5 41 Tension

46
CB -200 0 323 379.91 −5 41 Tension
46
CD 0 460 323 562.08 5 -122 Compression
23
 5.0 DISCUSSION

1. Compare the analysis data between computer software with theoretical analysis.

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS
Members Lx(mm) Ly(mm) Lz (mm) L t T (N) Result

CA 200 0 323 379.91 −15 62 Tension

92
CB -200 0 323 379.91 −15 62 Tension
92
CD 0 460 323 562.08 15 -183 Compression
46

COMPUTER SOFTWARE
Member Lx(mm) Ly(mm) Lz (mm) L t T (N) Result

CA 200 0 323 379.91 −15 62 Tension

92
CB -200 0 323 379.91 −15 62 Tension
92
CD 0 460 323 562.08 15 -183 Compression
46

Based on the table, the T(N) force is compared between theoretical analysis and computer
software. The comparison between the theoretical and computer software results is not much
difference. For example, both tension coefficient theoretical method and software analysis. For
tension coefficient theoretical method. Member AB, AC, and AD is 62N, 62N, and -183N
while software analysis are 41N, 41and -122N. The theoretical result is rounded off to the
nearest whole number in order to achieve same result as in software analysis.
2. Discuss your obtained data and results regarding

From our data achieved, we can identify the tension and compression in all 3 members for
both member CA and CB these are in tension while member CD in compression.

3. Determine the possible errors occurring during design using software.

The possible errors that can occur during design using software is ‘Spring Command’. As
the spring is stretched in a positive global direction, the "Spring tension" command is
supplied. The spring is therefore identified as being in tension, and the support reaction
will be negative due to the fact that it is opposite the displacement. The string is
compressed in the negative direction of the global axis if the "Spring Compression"
command is used. The spring is thus identified as being in compression, and the spring
support reaction will be positive because it is in the opposite direction as the nodal
displacement in STAAD PRO. This will cause a lot of confusion and misunderstandings
when filling in data during lab reports. Another error is when an error message shows up
on the software and immediately turns off the software causing the completed design to be
unsaved. This is because the software does not have enough administrative power on your
laptop

6.0 CONCLUSION

The experiment's objective is to illustrate the poor relative worth of theoretical and computer
software. Space frames commonly span in several directions and are frequently used to
produce large spans with little support. Due to the inherent stiffness of the triangular frame,
flexing loads (bending moments) are transmitted as tension and compression loads along the
length of each component. Generally, theoretical analytical data will vary only little from
computer software. Experimental data may demonstrate noticeable variances in the outcome
due to human error during the experiment or instrumental error due to the instrument being
often used by others, which may compromise its accuracy.
7.0 REFERENCES

Engr. Ikhwan Z. (2013), Space frame, Faculty of Civil and Environmental

Engineering Department of Structure and Material Engineering
https://www.scribd.com/document/177199839/Space-Frame

Tension Compression Only Spring Support (2014), Bentley

https://communities.bentley.com/products/ram-
staad/w/structural_analysis_and_design wiki/12687/tensioncompression-only-
spring- support

Tension Vs Compression, Civil Jungle. Retrieved January 10, 2022, from

https://civiljungle.com/tension-vs-compression/

Computational Techniques for Multiphase Flows, 2010. Retrieved January 5,

2022, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/tension-
coefficient
8.0 APPENDIX