DEDAN KIMATHI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

UNIT: SOLID MECHANICS

UNIT CODE: EMG 5105

TITLE: DEFLECTION BEAMS

NAME REG NO. SIGN

1. ISAAC WANJE. E023-01-2202/2021

2. IAN OTIENO. E023-01-1474/2021

3. NORMAN SANDE. E023-01-1502/2021

4. JACTON OKAKA E023-01-1511/2021

5. NICK GATHUMA E023-01-1436/2021

LECTURER’S NAME: JAMES WAGARA

TECHNOLOGIST:

SUBMISSION DATE: 8TH NOVEMBER 2023

1
ABSTRACT
The experiment aimed at examining the deflection of the cantilever beam when subjected to an
increasing point load, determining the modulus of elasticity of the beam and determining what
material was suitable for the beam. This was achieved by setting up a cantilever beam through
use of clamps and setting up a dial indicator under the beam. Different masses were placed on
the beam and its deflection displayed by the dial indicator. The obtained results were recorded
and various graphs i.e., graph of deflection against mass and graph of deflection against load
were drawn in order to show and summarize their relationships. From the obtained results, the
deflection of the cantilever beam was directly influenced by the magnitude of the loads applied.
The deflection of the beam was directly proportional to the applied loads. The obtained results
deviated from from the theoretical values due factors such as manufacturing tolerances, friction
and damping etc. The experiment provided key insights in understanding the linear relationship
between applied load and deflection hence improving on structural designs which reduce
potential hazards such as structural failure, environmental pollution and budget overruns and also
helps engineers on risk assessments

INTRODUCTION

The deflections of a beam are engineering concerns as they can create an unstable structure if
they are large. People don’t want to work in a building in which the floor beams deflect an
excessive amount, even though it may be in no danger of failing. Deflection refers to the
deformation of a beam under a load or moment, resulting in bending and displacement from its
original position. When loads are applied to a beam their originally straight axes become curved.
Displacements from the initial axes are called bending or flexural deflections. The amount of
flexural deflection in a beam is related to the beam’s cross-sectional area moment of inertia (I),
the single applied concentrated load (P), length of the beam (L), the modulus of elasticity (E),
and the position of the applied load on the beam. The amount of deflection due to a single
concentrated load P, is given by:

δ = PL3∕kEI

where k is a constant based on the position of the load, and on the end conditions of the beam.

The bending stress at any location of a beam section is determined by the flexure formula;

σ = ─My ∕I

where: M - internal moment at the section y - distance from the neutral axis to the point of
interest I - moment of inertia of the cross-sectional area about the neutral axis. The largest stress
at the same section follows from the above equation, by taking y at an extreme fiber at distance c
from the neutral axis which leads to:

σ max = Mc ∕I

In this section, the report highlights the key differences between cantilever and simply supported
beams in terms of deflection, emphasizing the impact of support conditions on their behavior.

2
Cantilever and simply supported beams represent two fundamental support configurations, each
with distinct deflection characteristics.

A. Cantilever beams

characterized by having support at one end only while remaining free at the other. This single
support condition significantly affects their deflection behavior. The supported end of a
cantilever beam is usually considered as a fixed support. This means that rotation at the support
is restricted, and the beam can only translate vertically.

B. Simply supported beams

Characterized by having support at both ends, creating different support conditions compared to
cantilever beams. The support conditions for simply supported beams are often considered as
pinned supports at both ends. This allows for both vertical translation and rotation at the
supports.

Applications

Cantilever beams are widely used in engineering; the construction of balconies, diving boards,
and some types of bridges. Understanding the deflection of cantilever beams is essential for
ensuring the safety and durability of such structures.

Simply supported beams are commonly used in various civil and mechanical engineering
applications, such as bridges, floor beams, and roof trusses. Understanding deflection is essential
for designing these structures to ensure that they can support the expected loads safely.

Potential Hazards and Risks

i. Structural Failure: The most severe risk associated with deflection analysis is structural
failure. If the deflection calculations are inaccurate or not properly considered, it may
lead to overloading, buckling, or other structural failures in the beams.
ii. Data Inaccuracy: Inaccurate material properties, load data, or calculation errors can result
in incorrect deflection values, leading to design flaws and potential structural issues.
iii. Safety Hazards: During testing or inspections, there can be safety hazards associated with
working near or under beams that may have excessive deflection.
iv. Design Changes: Late identification of significant deflection can lead to costly design
changes and delays in construction projects.
v. Budget and Schedule Overruns: Errors in deflection analysis may necessitate costly
modifications, resulting in budget overruns and project schedule delays.
vi. Environmental Impact: Structural failures could have environmental impacts, such as the
release of hazardous materials or damage to the surrounding environment.

3
Risk Assessment

To assess the risks associated with deflection analysis in cantilever and simply supported beams,
the following factors should be considered:

i. Quality of Data: Ensure that all data used in the analysis, including material properties,
loads, and support conditions, are accurate and up to date.
ii. Software and Tools: Utilize reliable and well-validated software tools for deflection
analysis to minimize the risk of calculation errors.
iii. Review and Verification: Conduct a comprehensive review and verification process of the
analysis results by experienced engineers to minimize the risk of inaccuracies.
iv. Safety Measures: Implement safety measures, such as restricting access to areas with
high deflection risk during testing or construction.

Project Management: Efficient project management and continuous monitoring are essential to
identify and address deflection-related issues as early as possible.

Emergency Response Plan: Develop an emergency response plan that includes procedures for
addressing structural failures or safety hazards resulting from excessive deflection.

OBJECTIVES

i. To observe, evaluate and report on the load-deflection relationship of a simply supported

beam and a cantilever beam.
ii. To determine the modulus of elasticity of the beam and what the material the beam is
made of using beam deflection theory.
iii. To verify the principle of superposition and Maxwell’s Reciprocity Theorem.
iv. To demonstrate the practical applications of deflection analysis in structural engineering
and construction by discussing real-world examples and the importance of accurate
deflection predictions.

4
METHODOLOGY
Apparatus
➢ Beams
➢ Clamping devices
➢ Various loads
➢ Dial indicator
➢ Vernier callipers
➢ Meter rod

Converting the masses used in the experiments to loads.

Mass (grams) Load (Newtons)
150 1.47
200 1.96
300 2.94
400 3.92
500 4.90

PROCEDURE
i. The width, depth, and length of the beam were measured.
ii. With these measurements, the second moment area was calculated.
iii. A cantilever was set up using clamps.
iv. The dial indicator was slid into position on the beam.
v. Masses were applied to the beam starting from 150g, and the deflection from the dial
indicator was observed.
vi. The results from the dial indicator for each mass increment were recorded.

DATA PRESENTATION
TABLE 1
MASS(grams) ACTUAL DEFLECTION THEORETICAL DEFLECTION

0 0 0
150 0.976 0.3560
200 1.304 0.4747
300 2.081 0.7120
400 2.780 0.9493
500 3.490 1.1870

5
TABLE 2

LOAD(newton) ACTUAL THEORETICAL

DEFLECTION DEFLECTION
0 0 0
1.47 0.976 0.3560
1.96 1.304 0.4747
2.94 2.081 0.7120
3.92 2.780 0.9493
4.90 3.490 1.1870

GRAPH I

GRAPH OF DEFLECTION AGAINST MASS

4

3.5

3
DEFLECTION

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
MASS (GRAMS)

ACTUAL DEFLECTION THEORETICAL DEFLECTION

GRAPH 2

6
 GRAPH OF DEFLECTION AGAINST LOAD
4

3.5
DEFLECTION 3

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
LOAD (newtons)

ACTUAL DEFLECTION THEORETICAL DEFLECTION

DISCUSSION

In this experiment, one of the major objectives was to understand the deflection behavior of a
cantilever beam subjected to various masses ranging from 0 N to 4.905 N (equivalent to 0 kg to
0.5 kg). The experiments provided valuable insights into the relationship between applied loads
and the resulting deflection, but also raised questions regarding the observed differences between
theoretical and experimental values.

Experimental data verified the fundamental principle that the deflection of a cantilever beam is
directly influenced by the magnitude of the applied loads. As the load increased incrementally
from 0 N to 4.905 N, it was consistently observed a corresponding increase in deflection. This
linear relationship, rooted in Hooke's Law, holds true within the elastic limit of the material.

One of the significant observations from the study is the noticeable deviation between the
theoretical values, as predicted by Euler-Bernoulli beam theory, and our actual lab experiment
data. This discrepancy can be attributed to several factors:

i. Material Properties: The theoretical values assume idealized material properties, such as
perfect linearity and homogeneity. In reality, materials may exhibit nonlinear behavior, especially
at higher loads, which can lead to variations in deflection.

ii. Boundary Conditions: The theoretical model often assumes idealized boundary
conditions, such as perfect fixity at the support. In the laboratory setting, achieving such
conditions precisely can be challenging, leading to differences between theoretical and
experimental results.

iii. Manufacturing Tolerances: The actual dimensions and quality of the cantilever beam used
in the experiments may deviate from the idealized assumptions made in the theoretical model,
affecting the deflection behavior.

7
iv. Friction and Damping: In practical experiments, friction and damping effects may come
into play, affecting the results. These factors are typically not considered in theoretical
calculations.

The graphical representation of deflection against load provides a visual summary of the
experimental findings. As shown in Graph 2, the graph displays a linear relationship, indicating
that deflection increases proportionally with applied load, within the linear elastic range. The
slope of the graph represents the stiffness of the cantilever beam.

Noted that while there is a clear linear trend, there is also a visible spread in the data points,
which can be attributed to the factors mentioned earlier, such as material nonlinearity, boundary
condition deviations, and measurement errors.

Despite the deviations between theoretical and experimental values, the study provides essential
insights for engineers and designers. Understanding the linear relationship between load and
deflection remains valuable for structural design. Engineers should be aware of these deviations
and consider the practical limitations when applying theoretical models to real-world scenarios.

CONCLUSION

The deflection of a cantilever beam is directly proportional to the applied load within the elastic
limit of the material. This relationship was shown by the graphs drawn above which displayed a
linear relationship. Using the formulas, in the theory section, bending stress and modulus of
elasticity of the beam could be determined which is essential in determing the suitable material
for the beam. This experiment is essential in solving our real-world problems i.e., determining
the materials to be used in creating bridges, floor beams, roof trusses etc. by assuring safety and
reducing potential risks.