The University of the South Pacific

School of Information Technology, Engineering, Mathematics and

Physics

MM/CV 211 – Solid Mechanics I

Lab 2: Forces in a Simple Cantilever Truss

Lab Session Time: Thursday 12pm

Student Name: Jayden Naidu (S11209840), Eroni Daunibau (S11212046), Robert Waqanivau
(S11210835), Jeniffer Telefoni (S11222532)
Group #: 2
“
AIM
 To study the relationship between True Strain against Applied Load
 To derive the Forces on each member using the measured Strain and Modulus of
Elasticity of the material (steel)
 To study and analyze a statically determinate frame using simple pin join analysis and
comparing the determined member forces with the experimental results
“
INTRODUCTION
In structural engineering, it is important to understand the relationship between true strain and
applied load as they play a vital role in assessing structural systems under various conditions. In
simple terms, true strain is the measure of deformation per unit length when a material is
subjected to tensile loading [1]. True strain can then be denoted by the formula,

δL
ε t=∫
L

Where ‘δL ’ is the change in length and ‘ L’is the original length of the material before
deformation.
With the fundamentals of these core topics reviewed, for this given lab, there is no doubt that
they possess a strong correlation with the method of pin joint analysis. A cantilever truss is a
structural support fixed at one or both ends and distributes the load between its members [2].
When analyzing structural elements such as trusses, the method of pin joint analysis is used to
determine the external reactions with the given supports. By applying the pin joint analysis
method onto a cantilever truss, this analytic approach helps to determine the distributed forces
across each member with respect to a given node. Furthermore, by applying the equilibrium of
forces, we can equate the resultant force equations to zero to determine the unknown forces
within each member of the cantilever truss [3].

When a material is subjected to various forces such as stress, the modulus of elasticity or the
elastic modulus is then used to measure the materials resistance to elastic deformation [4].

Fig.1 Modulus of Elasticity [5]

The slope in the figure above depicts the modulus of a stress and strain curve. When a material is
under stress, they will first exhibit elastic properties where the stress applied will cause it to
deform [4]. After the slope has passed through the elastic region and through their yielding point
(yield strength), they will exhibit the ultimate strength the material can withstand just before
permanent deformation.
When the cantilever truss is subjected to loading, the modulus of the material used (steel) is then
used to determine the experimental stress in the member by the formula,

σ
E=
ε

Where ‘σ ’ is the stress in the member, ‘ ε ’ is the displayed strain and ‘ E ’ is the Young’s modulus
for steel (210 GN /m2). From the theoretical value that was determined using the pin joint
analysis method, we can obtain the experimental value from the strain display to compare and
understand the forces in each member.

EQUIPMENTS/ MATERIALS
 Digital Strain Display
 Mass Hanger (50g)
 450g Masses
 Micrometer

METHODOLOGY
1. As the Test Frame was already fully assembled and positioned on the workbench, we
started by noting down the number assigned for each member on the experiment structure
in Table 2.
2. After ensuring that the equipment is correctly installed and secured, a preload of 100 N
was applied (in the direction of loading), then zeroed the load cell.
3. A 500 N load was applied carefully similarly to the previous step, and then returning the
load to zero.
4. Weights specified in Table 2 were then applied accordingly and the strain values were
recorded for each of the members.
5. To get genuine readings, the zero load strain data from Table 1 was subtracted (with care
for the signs). Table 2 was then completed.
6. Using Young’s Modulus, which is the ratio of stress to strain, E=σ/ε, where E is Young’s
Modulus (N/m²), σ is stress (N/m²), and ε is shown strain, the stress was found.
7. And using the formula σ=F/A, where F represents the member’s force and A as its cross-
sectional area, the experimental forces for each member were calculated
8. A graph of Load (N) versus Strain (µε) was made for members AC and AD.
 9. By using suitable methods, the theoretical member forces were calculated for the
framework with the 500 N load, then completing Table 3, the theoretical and
experimental results were then compared.

RESULTS/ ANALYSIS

Table 1: True Strain Reading

True Strain Reading (µε)

Load
Member AB Member AC Member AD
(N)
Number = 1 Number = 11 Number = 5
0 0 0 0
100 2 24 -15
200 0 49 -30
300 -1 75 -46
400 -2 101 -63
500 -5 125 -78

Table 2: Comparison of experimental and theoretical forces for 500N applied load.

Member Member Experimental Force Theoretical Force

Number (N) (N)
AB 1 -29.69 0
AC 11 742.88 707.106
AD 5 -463.55 -500

Calculation for experimental force

Esteel = 210GN/m2; Rod diameter = 6x10-3m

σ
E=
ε
 σ =ε × E
−6 9
σ =−5 ×10 × 210× 10
6
σ =1.05 ×10 Pa (Value of stress)

2 F
πd σ=
A= A
4
−3 2 F=σ × A
π (6 × 10 )
A= 6 −5
4 F=−1.05 ×10 ×2.83 × 10

A=2.83 ×10 m
−5 2 F=−29.69 N

The other two experimental forces were calculated using this method.
 Negative force is compression while positive is tension.

Calculation For Theoretical Force

FDB

0.14m 45
45 °
B

C
0.14m
W = 500N

W = 500N
Moments acting on Point A
∑ MA =0=− Ax ( 0.14 ) +500(0.14) (clockwise is positive)
 500(0.14)
Ax=
0.14
Ax=500 N
Ay = -500N (Member AD)
Forces at AB
∑ Fx=0=−500+ FAB × cos 45
500
FAB=
cos 45
FAB=707.106 N (Member = AC)

 Member AB will be 0 due to roller joint.

Load (N) against Strain (µε)

150

100

50
Strain

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
-50

-100
Load

AC AD

Fig.2 Graph of Load (N) against Strain (µε)

The above graph depicts that at during the increase in load from 0 to 500N for Member
AC, the strain values increased. However, for Member AD, since there is more load
applied onto it there is an increase in area thus the stress induced will proportionally
decrease.

DISCUSSION
The result of this lab continues to depict the relationship between true strain and applied
load. Also allowed students to practice prior knowledge absorbed from units taken earlier.
In the experiment it was noted that different number of forces acting on each member as
result of the distribution of forces within the cantilever truss under different loading
conditions [1]. By applying principles of statics and structural analysis, it was possible to
measure the strength and the direction of each member. The determining of the tension and
compression of the internal forces of the beams was important it was noted that when a
member is pressed together with another object it shows that it is in compression whereas
if a member is pressed together, compression forces develop, whereas tension forces
happen a member is pulled apart [2].
This Lab report will focus on the relationship between true strain against applied load,
deriving the forces on each member using the measured strain and modulus of elasticity of
the material and to analyse a statically determinate frame using simple member. From the
data obtained from the experiment it can be said that where the force is applied is directly
related to the distribution of forces. Point of application of loads play a key role whether it
be close or further from the point fixed to where the point is applied [1]. Furthermore,
when a load is applied to the area to where it is closer to the fixed area tend to experience
great number of forces. This is because the load tends to create a moment at the joint thus
causing forces to be in tension or compression in the members to enable the system to
maintain equilibrium.
Various observations and comparison were taken during the conducting of the lab, one of
which was that that forces each member varied more specifically the member adjacent to
where the force is applied and the member that was 45 0 to where the force was applied had
both experienced the greatest amount force compared to the member that was fixed to the
wall, this directly proves that having a good depth of knowledge on moments plays a key
role in the understanding of the concepts of this experiment [2]. In table 1 it depicts the
result of each when different forces are applied to it. The forces began at 0N and later
ended at 500N which varied in intervals of 100N. member AB experienced the least
amount force as it was almost parallel to where the direction of the force was applied, as
moments is only present/best when forces are not parallel to the line of action. As for the
two members AC & CB in comparison of the two members AC had higher number of
forces, as mentioned already this is due to the perpendicular distance between the line of
action and member AC. Moreover, in table 2 the comparison of the experimental and
theoretical values with respect to mass 500N was carried out. The theoretical values were
 obtained from the gauge that was attached to the cantilever and the experimental values
were computed using Pin Joint Analysis. In the table 2 it can be easily highlighted that
members AB do not match in terms of the theoretical and experimental aspects, as for the
members AC and CD had 742.88N and -463.55N for their respective experimental Forces,
and for their theoretical forces it was noted at 707.106N for member AC and -500N for
member CD. As for the above-mentioned results it can be highlighted that all members had
varying results this is due to the lack human awareness to the procedure being emphasised
in lab manual, human errors while placing the masses on the mass hanger it was,
instrumental errors in the measurement devices, idealized structural behaviour. Trusses are
subjected to different elements and forces such bending or buckling which were neglected
during the conducting of this experiment. These errors have directly influenced the amount
errors in our result thus causing uncertain varying data collection.

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES
[1] Y. ÇAPAR, "Engineering Stress/Strain vs True Stress/Strain," 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://yasincapar.com/engineering-stress-strain-vs-true-stress-strain/. [Accessed 1 April 2024].

[2] T. E. o. E. Britannica, "cantilever bridge," 6 June 2023. [Online]. Available:

https://www.britannica.com/technology/cantilever-bridge. [Accessed 2 April 2024].

[3] Testbook, "Equilibrium of Forces: Learn the Principles, Methods, and Theorems here!," 26 April 2023.
[Online]. Available: https://testbook.com/mechanical-engineering/equilibrium-of-
forces#:~:text=Equilibrium%20forces%20are%20a%20set,making%20it%20a%20vector%20quantity..
[Accessed 2 April 2024].

[4] INSTRON, "Modulus of Elasticity," [Online]. Available:

https://www.instron.com/en/resources/glossary/modulus-of-elasticity. [Accessed 2 April 2024].

[5] Xometry, Elastic Modulus: Definition, Values, and Examples, 2023.

Bibliography (For discussion & conclusion section)

[1] C. N. A. B. Tarsicio Belendez, "Large and small deflections of a cantilever," European Journal of
physics, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 371-379, 2002.

[2] R. R. R. a. A. K. B. T. R. Kane, "Dynamics of a cantilever beam attached to a moving base," Aerospace

Research Central, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 139, 1987.

[3] N. A. F. M. N. A. J. Z.A. Jassim, "Engineering Failure Analysis," Science Direct, vol. 31, pp. 442-461,
2013.