Experiment A: Complex Stresses

MAAE 3202 C/ L2
Muhammad Ameen
101196524
19/10/2023
Objectives

The objective of the experiment is to determine the principal centroidal axes and stresses in a
cantilever beam subjected to first a pure bending moment and a second combined bending
and torsion. The beam was initially loaded incrementally using metal weights with specified
weights down the center of the beam, during which the strain gauge values were recorded for
each weight. Afterwards the weights were loaded simultaneously at a distance of 140 mm,
and the gauge values were recorded. Calculations were performed afterwards to determine
the metal properties such as Young’s Modulus and Poisson’s Ratio. In addition, experimental
and theoretical values for the principal stresses induced from loading were compared for
insight into discrepancies between theory and real world applications.

Apparatus & Procedure

Figure 1. Schematic of end-loaded hollow circular cantilever beam

Figure 2. Principal views of end-loaded hollow circular cantilever beam

Table 1: Beam Dimensions & Distances to Locations

Beam Length 0.760 m

Outer Diameter (𝐷𝑜) 0.0508 m

Wall Thickness (𝑡) 0.00636 m

Distance to Strain Gauge (𝐿) 0.613 m

Torque Arm Length (𝑑) 0.140 m

Figure 3. Strain gauge orientation on the beam with respect to the longitudinal axis of the
beam

Figure 4. List of apparatus utilized for the experiment

Figure 5. Procedure followed for the experiment

Results

The following tables list the data gathered during the experiment. Strain gauges 1-3 indicate
the gauges on strain rosette A, gauges 4-6 indicate values for strain rosette B, and gauges 7-9
indicate the values for strain rosette C. The following formula is utilized to convert the
measured weight in kilograms into force with units of newtons:

𝐹 = 𝑚𝑎 [1]

Table 2: Experimental Strain Gauge Values for Pure Bending Moment for Unit B3
Mass Weig Gaug Gaug Gaug Gaug Gaug Gaug Gaug Gaug Gaug
(kg) ht e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 e7 e8 e9
(N) −6 −6 −6 −6 −6
(10 ) (10 ) (10 ) (10 ) (10 ) (10 ) (10 ) (10 ) (10 )
−6 −6 −6 −6

4.566 44.79 42 16 -15 3 0 -3 -16 -43 15

246

9.250 44.79 86 31 -30 7 0 -8 -33 -89 30

246

13.84 135.7 130 47 -45 10 -1 -12 -50 -133 44

704

18.41 180.6 172 63 -60 12 -1 -16 -66 -177 60

021

23.01 225.7 215 78 -75 16 -1 -20 -83 -220 74

281

Table 3: Experimental Strain Gauge Values for Bending & Torsion (140 mm torsion arm) for
Unit B3
Mass Weig Gaug Gaug Gaug Gaug Gaug Gaug Gaug Gaug Gaug
(kg) ht e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 e7 e8 e9
(N) −6 −6 −6 −6 −6
(10 ) (10 ) (10 ) (10 ) (10 ) (10 ) (10 ) (10 ) (10 )
−6 −6 −6 −6

23.01 225.7 214 111 -73 -17 -5 13 -49 -222 76

281

(I) Bending

a. Calculating the longitudinal stress at point A is done using the following formula like
so
𝑀𝑦
σ𝑥 = 𝐼
[2]
 (𝐹𝐿)(𝑅)
σ𝑥 = π 4 4
64
(𝐷 𝑜−𝐷 𝑖)

(44.79246)(0.613)(0.0254)
σ𝑥 = π 4 4
64
((0.0508) −[(0.0508)−2(0.00636)] )

σ𝑥 = 3. 1185 𝑀𝑃𝑎
The values for the each increment in applied load are tabulated as below:

Table 4: Theoretical Values for Pure Bending Stress for Unit B3

Applied Load (N) Longitudinal Stress (MPa)

44.79246 3.118498156

44.79246 6.317588248

135.7704 9.452477984

180.6021 12.57370807

225.7281 15.71542763

b. Plotting the calculated longitudinal stress against the measured longitudinal strain
yields the following graph:

Figure 6. Plotted values for Longitudinal Stress & Strain at Strain Rosette A

As shown by the graph above, the slope of the trend line represents the expression:

σ𝑥
𝐸= ε1
[3]
 Hence,

72797 𝑀𝑃𝑎
𝐸= −6
10

𝐸 = 72. 797 𝐺𝑃𝑎

Solving the equation produces a final theoretical Young’s Modulus value of 73 GPa.
Compared to the published value of 72 GPa, the error is found to be 1.4%.

c. Plotting the transverse strain against the longitudinal strain yields the following graph

Figure 7. Plotted values for Longitudinal & Transverse Strain at Strain Rosette A

Given the slope trend line represents the following expression:

ε3
ν =− ε1
[4]

ν =− 0. 347

The calculated value for Poisson’s Ratio is 0.35. Comparing this to the published
value, the error is found to be 5.7%.

d. The principal stresses when 𝑊𝑚𝑎𝑥 is applied can be determined using the following
equation:

1 1 2 2
σ1, σ2 = 2
σ𝑥 ± 2
σ 𝑥
+ 4τ [5]
 When dealing with pure bending moment, the transverse shear stress is determined to
be 0

Hence,

1 1 2 2
σ1, σ2 = 2
(15. 715) ± 2
(15. 715) + 0

σ1 = 15. 715 𝑀𝑃𝑎 (𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛)

σ2 = 0 𝑀𝑃𝑎

The direction of the principal stresses are along the longitudinal axis of the beam, and
perpendicular to the direction of loading.

(II) Combined Bending & Torsion

a. In order to plot the Mohr’s Circle for point A, values for ε𝑥, ε𝑦, γ𝑥𝑦, 𝑅, ε𝑐 are
required. The first two values are provided directly from the strain gauge readings
(ε1, ε3), while γ𝑥𝑦 can be found by solving the following equation:

γ𝑥𝑦 = (𝑠𝑖𝑛 2θ − 𝑐𝑜𝑠 2θ)ε1 + 2 𝑐𝑜𝑠 2θε2 − (𝑠𝑖𝑛 2θ + 𝑐𝑜𝑠 2θ)ε3 [6]

Given that θ = 0 since the strain gauge is normal to the longitudinal axis

γ𝑥𝑦 = (𝑠𝑖𝑛 2(0) − 𝑐𝑜𝑠 2(0))ε1 + 2 𝑐𝑜𝑠 2(0)ε2 − (𝑠𝑖𝑛 2(0) + 𝑐𝑜𝑠 2(0))ε3

γ𝑥𝑦 =− ε1 + 2ε2 − ε3

γ𝑥𝑦 =− (214) + 2(111) − (− 73)

−6
γ𝑥𝑦 = 81 × 10

In addition, solving for the radius and center of the circle is done by using the
equations below:

1 2 2
𝑅= 4
[(ε𝑥 − ε𝑦) + γ 𝑥𝑦
] [7]
 1 2 2
𝑅= 4
[(214 − (− 73)) + (81) ]

𝑅 = 149. 12

ε𝑥+ε𝑦
ε𝑐 = 2
[8]

(214+(−73)
ε𝑐 = 2

ε𝑐 = 70. 5

The final step is to find the principal strains of the beam which are found using the
method below:

ε1𝑃, ε2𝑃 = ε𝑐 ± 𝑅 [9]

−6 −6
ε1𝑃 = 219. 62 × 10 , ε2𝑃 =− 78. 62 × 10

Using the values obtained above the Mohr’s Circle is constructed as follows:

Figure 8. Strain Mohr’s Circle of Combined Moment & Torsion at Strain Gauge A
b. To determine the experimental and theoretical values of the principal stresses at point
A, the following methodology is used:

i. To find the experimental stress in the beam at point A, a system of equations

using Hooke’s Law is solved as follows:

1
ε1𝑃 = 𝐸
(σ1 − 𝑣σ2) [10]

1
ε2𝑃 = 𝐸
(σ2 − 𝑣σ1) [11]

Using the values obtained previously for the principal strains, Young’s
Modulus, and Poisson’s Ratio,

−6 1
219. 62 × 10 = (72.797)
(σ1 − (0. 347)σ2)

−6 1
− 78. 62 × 10 = (72.797)
(σ2 − (0. 347)σ1)

σ1 = 15. 918 𝑀𝑃𝑎 (𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛), σ2 =− 0. 19961 𝑀𝑃𝑎 (𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛)

ii. To find the theoretical values of the principal stresses at point A, the following
methodology is used:

Initially, the transverse shear stress (no longer 0 due to torsion) is found using
the following equation:

𝑇𝑟
τ= 𝐽
[12]

(𝐹𝑑)(𝑟)
τ= π 4 4
32
(𝐷 𝑜−𝐷 𝑖)

(225.7281)(0.140)(0.0254)
τ= π 4 4
32
((0.0508) −[(0.0508)−2(0.00636)] )

τ = 1. 7942 𝑀𝑃𝑎

The next step is to use equation [5] and solve for the principal stresses using
the acquired value for the transverse shear stress, hence:

1 1 2 2
σ1, σ2 = 2
σ𝑥 ± 2
σ 𝑥
+ 4τ
 1 1 2 2
σ1, σ2 = 2
(15. 715) ± 2
(15. 715) + 4(1. 7942)

σ1 = 15. 917 𝑀𝑃𝑎 (𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛), σ2 =− 0. 20224 𝑀𝑃𝑎 (𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛)

iii. It is observed that the discrepancies between the two calculations only differ
by about 0.0063% and 1.3 % respectively for the first and second principal
stresses. The small difference that is observed can be accounted for by
considering the effect of previously acquired values for Young’s Modulus and
Poisson’s Ratio as well as the effect of significant figures in calculations.

c. If the material were to fail by yielding in the plane of maximum shear stress, they
would occur along the planes where shear stress is at a maximum, which occurs on
1
the plane 2
θ away from the principal planes, where the shear stress is 0. In this case,
𝑜 𝑜
the angle would be 45 , since the angle between the principal planes is 90 . The
illustration below shows the shows the fault line:

Figure 9. Plane of Maximum Shear Stress Failure With Respect to Principal Planes

Discussion

The experimental values for Young’s Modulus and Poisson’s Ratios have a 1.4% and 5.7%
which shows that experimental values are nearly equivalent. The importance of linearity in
the slopes of the equations represents elastic deformation in the material, whereby the
material retains its shape after the load is removed. A non-linear relationship between the
strain and load would indicate plastic deformation, which affects the stress and strain
relationships.

The combined loading affects the principal stresses in the sense that slightly increase their
absolute values since there is added transverse shear stress induced by offset loading.
Equation [5] outlines the relationship between the principal stresses and the stress induced
along the centroidal axis and the shear stress, which shows that proportionally speaking, the
principal stresses increase as the cardinal and shear stresses increase.

The principal stresses themselves represent the normal stress along loading planes on which
the transverse shear stress is 0. When considering the design element, it is important to
consider the values of the member under pure tension and compression thereby allowing the
engineer to design and select the optimal material, beam cross section, and orientation to
withstand the expected normal stress.

The maximum shear plane is located at an angle of 45 degrees from the principal planes
which is represented on the Mohr’s Circle as 90 degrees.

Limitations affecting the experimental setup include the placement of the loading mechanism
which may not be perfectly aligned with the centroidal axis of the beam, thus affecting the
strain gauge readings.

One of the sources of error was the strain gauge mechanism that required zeroing to allow for
proper measurement of strain. In short, this meant any possible misstep in not zeroing in the
dials would result in skewed numbers. A simple fix would see the installation of automatic
gauges that are more accurate and respond automatically to loading conditions without
further input. A second source of error was the plate loading that affected the beam with
slight vibrations, thus tampering with the strain measurements. This can be affected using a
constant force generator like a motor pressing on the torque arm at a constant force thus
eliminating dynamic conditions.

Conclusion

To reiterate the findings of the experiment, it was determined that the principal centroidal
axes were along the centroidal axis for the beam when inducing a pure bending movement,
but the orientation deviated by about 4 degrees counterclockwise centroidal axis. The
principal stresses were calculated to be 15.175 MPa and 0 for pure bending moment and
15.918 and -0.1996 MPa for combined bending and torsion. The theoretical values for the
combined load were found to be 15.917 MPa and -0.20224 MPa. Values for Young’s
Modulus and Poisson’s Ratio were found to be 72.797 GPa and 0.347, respectively. Analysis
of experimental values and theoretical values concluded that slight differences in numbers
were the result of compounding errors and experimental faults. However, the discrepancies
are statistically insignificant, and further solidifies the theoretical principles for further
analysis and comprehension of solid behavior under complex loading conditions.

References

MAAE 3202 Mechanics of Solids II Laboratory Experiments, pg 2-10

https://brightspace.carleton.ca/d2l/le/content/210210/viewContent/3342263/View