SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING

Year 1 Laboratories

B&C
Beam and Cable
Technical Note

Surname (Family Name): Edorodion Other Names: Isaac

Student ID Number: 201713013

Programme: Engineering with Product Design

Demonstrator’s Name: Eran I.

Lab group number: ID1 Date of experiment (DD/MM/YYYY):

13/11/23

STUDENT DECLARATION:
 B&C Technical Note // ENGG110

I confirm that I have:

 Read and understood the University’s Academic Integrity Policy. (Students should familiarise
themselves with Appendix L of the University’s Code of Practice on Assessment which also
provides the definitions of academic malpractice and the policies and procedures that apply to
the investigation of alleged incidents.);
 Acted honestly, ethically and professionally in conduct leading to this assessment;
 Not copied material from another source, nor committed plagiarism, nor fabricated data when
completing this work;
 Not colluded with any other student in the preparation and production of this work.
Students found to have committed academic malpractice are liable to receive a mark of zero for the
assessment or the module concerned. Unfair and dishonest academic practice will attract more
severe penalties, including possible suspension or termination of studies.
 B&C Technical Note // ENGG110

Overview
This technical note template is the entire submission for the B&C lab. Complete it by following the
prompts and instructions, then submit it in Canvas using the Turnitin submission link. You will lose
marks if you do not follow the instructions. In industry and research there are often very strict
guidelines given for layout and page length of reports, so it is a useful skill to learn. Keep sections at
the top of each page as indicated in this template. Your B&C lab technical note should not exceed 10
pages. The layout in this document is not exactly the same as it would be in a formal report, but the
aim is to prepare you for writing reports later. You should use the feedback provided to improve your
work.

This technical note contains the following sections:

Abstract 15%
Part A
Results 25%
Discussion 15%
Part B
Results 35%
Discussion 10%

Your submitted technical note will be marked by the laboratory teaching assistant (LTA) for the B&C
lab, normally within two weeks of the submission deadline. The module coordinator moderates the
marking of the LTA. Feedback provided will include marks awarded for each section, with the technical
note annotated with comments to explain where improvements can be made. You access your marked
technical notes and feedback comments through the Grades interface in Canvas.
 B&C Technical Note // ENGG110

1 Abstract/Summary
Writing an abstract is one of the hardest skills to master in formal lab report writing. An abstract is
normally placed at the beginning of a formal lab report, so that the reader can quickly see what is in
the document (including what, how and why the experiments were undertaken, and what were the
key findings and conclusions, all in a very limited number of words). The abstract/summary is often
the last part to be written.

Write an abstract for the entire Beam and Cables lab. The abstract should be no more than 300 words
(typically about 250 words) as the purpose of an abstract is to be concise. A typical abstract contains:

• 1-2 sentences that introduce the aim of the lab, and what you hoped to achieve.
• 1-2 sentences describing the experimental tests you undertook.
• 1-2 sentences summarising your main findings and results.
• 1-2 sentences containing your conclusions.

The goal of the Beam and Cables lab was to investigate static equilibrium concepts in practical
engineering systems. The main goal was to estimate and compute the loading and reaction forces
required to keep the system in equilibrium. Finding the forces needed to maintain equilibrium on a
pivot-point balanced beam and calculating reaction forces on a simply-supported beam under point
loading were two specific objectives. Using measurement tools to gather data and evaluate the
correctness of force estimations, experimental tests entailed analysing response forces on the
beams. The forces essential for structural stability were modelled and predicted using the concepts
of solid mechanics. Important findings demonstrated accurate reaction force computations under
various loads, highlighting the usefulness of applying theoretical ideas to equilibrium determination.
These findings proved how crucial precise force forecasts are to maintaining structural integrity in
engineering systems. To sum up, the lab demonstrated the applicability and constraints of using
solid mechanics concepts in practical situations. It emphasised how important precise force
estimates are when constructing supports and beams that can sustain applied forces. By combining
their theoretical understanding with practical application in engineering design, engineers were able
to bridge the gap by developing the abilities to analyse, anticipate, and ensure structural stability.
 B&C Technical Note // ENGG110

2 Part A – Equilibrium of a Beam

Figure 1: A Simple Image to Indicate the Basic Form of the Experiment

2.1 Results

Graphical presentation of results

Double click anywhere inside the blue box on the page below to edit the embedded excel document.
This will allow you to complete the tables in the spread sheet. The graphs for this experiment are
simple and so they will be automatically produced for you upon completion of the tables.

You are then required to analyse your results, and the experiment itself, in the discussion section after
the embedded spread sheet.
B&C Technical Note // ENGG110
 B&C Technical Note // ENGG110

2.2 Discussion (Beam Equilibrium)

In your own words and using no more than this single page of text in total:

Experimental accuracy – if experiment 1 were repeated with 100g weights instead of 500g weights,
would the results be less or more accurate? Why?

Using 100g weights would likely result in less accurate results. Spring Balances struggle to measure
lighter loads accurately because of their sensitivity and resolution, affecting the precision of readings
compared to using heavier weights.

Based on your knowledge of load affecting accuracy from your answer above, which of the results
gathered from experiment 2 would you expect to be more accurate? Why?

It would be the results from using the heavier loads, like 80g and 100g.

What other factors within the experimental set up could be the cause of the difference between the
measured and theoretical results?

Could be that there is friction component against the weights going down caused by the grid board,
there could be a misalignment of the spring balances causing one spring balance to show a higher
result. And the other a lower one. The spring balance might not have been zeroed properly at the
beginning. Lastly it could simply be human errors in recording values.

Think of three ways the experiment could be improved to try and reduce these factors.

Calibrating the spring balances before each trial, using digital instruments able to measure smaller
forces accurately (for experiment 2), lastly repeating the experiment 3 times and taking an average for
each result.
 B&C Technical Note // ENGG110

3 Part B – Suspension Cable

3.1 Results

Table 1: Tension in Suspension Cable (7 x 40 means 7 hangers each totalling 40g in weight)

Chain
7.6 N
Weight
Chain Length 1.215 m

Number of links 94 Link Length 12.9 mm Link weight 0.0809 N

WS = Chain
6.26 N/m
Weight per unit length

Span 700mm
Predicted Tension Curved
Applied Load W* Overhang Total Tension** Sag Angle of the Chain
Reading (N) (N) Chain Length
(g) (N/m) Weight (N) Measured (N) (mm) (0)
see Equ. 2 & 3 (mm)
Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right
1.50
6.26 6.283413868 16.7
0 24 1.5024 3 3 4.5024 4.5024 80 739 19.89

7.1829
1.50 5.320459788 19.29
7  10 8387 1.4711 3.7 3.7 5.2024 5.2024 90 744 19.29
24

9.9029
1.43 22.1590139
7  40 7082 1.4711 5 3.6 6.5024 5.1024 110 754 28.81 24.23
98
 B&C Technical Note // ENGG110
𝐴𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑 × 𝑔
* 𝑊 = 𝑊𝑠 + 𝐶𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝐶ℎ𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝐿𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ

** Add weight of overhanging chain to spring balance reading

 B&C Technical Note // ENGG110

Graph 1: Cable Weight and Tension: Average Measured Tension (N) against Theoretical Tension (N)

Give your graph an appropriate caption

 B&C Technical Note // ENGG110

Cable weight against Average Measured Tension (N) and

Theoretical Tension (N)
14
12
10 avarage measured

Tension (N)
8 tension

6
Theor. Tension
4
2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Cable weight (N)

Figure 2: Cable weight against Average Measured Tension (N) and Theoretical Tension (N)
 B&C Technical Note // ENGG110

Sample Calculations
Use the boxes provided to state what the equation is used to find and provide an example of your
own calculations.

Equation 1: Find the new weight/ unit lenght of the cable

Applied load  g 𝟎 ∗ 𝟗.𝟖𝟏

W  WS  = 𝟔.𝟐 + 𝟎.𝟕𝟑𝟗 = 6.2 (N/m) (1)
Curved chain length

Equation 2: Tension (Horizontal)

W  S2 𝟔.𝟐 ∗ 𝟎.𝟕𝟑𝟗^𝟐
t = 𝟖 ∗ 𝟎.𝟎𝟖 = 5.291 (N) (2)
8y c

Equation 3: Theoretical Tension

t 𝟓.𝟐𝟗𝟏
T = 𝑪𝑶𝑺( 𝟎.𝟖𝟒𝟐) = 6.283 (N) (3)
cos θ
 B&C Technical Note // ENGG110

3.2 Discussion

Error Analysis

Please state THREE possible sources of error in your results (experimental and theoretical), and where
possible quantify them.

Error in counting chain links or imprecise measurement of the chain's length will cause different results
in tensions and angle calculation. Improper calibration will also cause variation in the result from the
theoretical and measured tension. Human error in marking the angles if the human is inconsistent.