Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 13

FORMAL REPORT

ME2114-2

Combined Bending & Torsion

12th February 2014

STUDENT NAME: LIM JUN HONG


MATRICULATION NUMBER: A0094506A
CLASS: 2I1

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING


NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE

Objectives
The objectives of the experiment include:
1. Analysing bending and torsion stresses by applying St. Venants principle and the
principle of superpostition, as well as the strain gauge technique
2. Determining the elastic constants of the test material and calculating the stress
components using Hookes law equations
3. Validating the experimental results against the theoretical results

Experimental Results:
(A) Determination of elastic constants
Table 1: Measurement of diameter of test specimen
Diameter of Tensile Test Piece (m)
d1
9.47E-03

d2
9.48E-03

Cross-Sectional Area
(m2)

dave
9.48E-03

7.05E-05

where Cross Sectional Area = dave 2/4

Table 2: Tabulation of Longitudinal and Transverse strains

Load P (N)

Stress,
x (MPa)

Longitudinal Strain,
x (x10-6)

Transverse Strain,
y (x10-6)

0.000

200

2.836

-4

400

5.673

28

-11

600

8.509

51

-20

800

11.346

83

-31

1000

14.182

125

-45

Taking raw data and applying the following formulae:


Load
Stress ,
MPa
Area

Graph 1: Longitudinal Stress vs Longitudinal Strain


16

Longitudinal Stress (MPa)

14
12
y = 0.1085x + 1.741

10
8
6
4
2
0
0

25

-2

50

75

100

125

150

Longitudinal Strain (x 10-6)

Graph 2: Transverse Strain vs Longitudinal Strain


0

Transverse Strain (x 10-6)

-5

25

50

75

100

-10
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40

y = -0.3591x - 0.7827

-45
-50

Longitudinal Strain (x 10-6)

125

150

Sample Calculations
Normal Stress, x = P/A
Using P = 200N and A = 7.05 x 10-5 m2
x = P/A
= 200 / 7.16 x 10-5
= 2.84 MPa
Youngs Modulus, E = x / x is the gradient of the longitudinal stress versus longitudinal
strain graph (Graph 1) and is found to be E = 108.5 GPa.
Poissons Ratio, = - y / x and it is the negative gradient of the longitudinal strain versus
transverse strain graph (Graph 2) and is found to be = 0.359.

E
2(1 v )
= (108.5 x 109) x 0.5 / (1 + 0.359)
= 39.92 GPa

Shear Modulus, G

(B) Combined bending and torsion Test


Table 3: Measurement of a, b & d
a (m)
0.15

b (m)
0.10

d, diameter of shaft (m)


0.016

Table 4: Tabulation of strain readings using a quarter bridge configuration


Strain (x 10-6)
Load (kg)

0.0

0.5

18

-9

-23

14

1.0

38

-20

-47

26

1.5

54

-30

-71

38

2.0

79

-40

-96

51

2.5

117

-50

-120

62

3.0

133

-60

-144

75

Table 5: Tabulation of strain readings using a full bridge and a quarter bridge configuration
Quarter-Bridge Configuration (x 10-6)

Load
(kg)

Full-Bridge Configuration (x 10-6)

0.0

0.5

64

18

68

22

1.0

131

39

138

45

1.5

193

57

207

68

2.0

266

84

275

91

2.5

349

125

342

115

3.0

412

142

409

137

Table 6: Tabulation of experimental and theoretical values of bending stress, x and shear
stress, xy
Experimental Stress (MPa)
Load (kg)

Theoretical Stress (MPa)

xy

xy

0.0

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.5

0.677

1.078

1.232

0.915

1.0

2.032

2.315

2.464

1.830

1.5

2.709

3.353

3.696

2.744

2.0

4.740

4.750

4.928

3.659

2.5

9.311

6.666

6.160

4.574

3.0

9.819

7.704

7.392

5.489

Graph 3: Bending Stress vs Load


12.000

Bending Stress (MPa)

10.000
8.000
6.000
4.000
2.000
0.000
0.0

0.5

1.0

-2.000

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

2.5

3.0

3.5

Load (kg)
Theoretical Stress

Experimental Stress

Graph 4: Shear Stress vs Load


9.000
8.000

Shear Stress (MPa)

7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0.000
-1.000

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

Load (kg)
Theoretical Stress

Experimental Stress

Graph 5: Load vs Strain, a


3.5
3.0

Load (kg)

2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0

100

200

-0.5

300

400

500

Strain, a (x 10-6)
Full Bridge

Quarter-Bridge

Linear (Full Bridge)

Linear (Quarter-Bridge)

Graph 6: Load vs Strain, b


3.5
3.0

Load (kg)

2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0

25

50

75

Strain, b (x
Full Bridge

Quarter-Bridge

100

125

10-6)

Linear (Full Bridge)

Linear (Quarter-Bridge)

150

Sample Calculations
Using Load = 1.5 kg
P = Load x g = 1.5 x 9.81 = 14.715 N
Theoretical Bending Stress at point A is given by
32bP
= (32 x 0.10 x 14.715) / ( x 0.0163)
x
3
d
= 3.70 MPa
Experimental Bending Stress at point A is given by
E
9
-6
-6
x
(1 4 ) = (108.5 x 10 ) x (54 x 10 38 x 10 ) / (1 0.359)
1 v
= 2.71 MPa
Theoretical Shear Stress at Point A is given by
16aP
= (16 x 0.15 x 14.715) / ( x 0.0163)
xy
3
d
= 2.74 MPa
Experimental Shear Stress at point A is given by
E
xy
( 1 2 ) = (108.5 x 109) x 0.5 x (54 x 10-6 + 30 x 10-6) / (1 + 0.359)
2(1 v)
= 3.35 MPa
Using Quarter-Bridge Configuration,
a = (1 + 4) (2 + 3)
= [(54 + 38) (-30 + 71)] x 10-6
= 193 x 10-6
b = (1 + 2) (3 + 4)
= [(54 - 30) (-71 + 38)] x 10-6
= 57 x 10-6

Discussion
1. Compare the theoretical stresses with the experimental values. Discuss possible
reasons for the deviations if any, in the results obtained.
Comparing the theoretical stresses and experimental values, it is observed that the values
between the two do not differ significantly, the difference between the two being roughly at
+1 MPa. However, at larger load of 2.5 kg onwards, it is observed that the difference between
the two exceeds 1 MPa for both bending and shear stress values. This observation may be
caused by the following factors:
a) The specimen that is tested has been used for a long period of time and applying
stresses on it over a number of experiments may lead to some changes in the property
of the specimen and thus affecting the experimental results.
b) Orientation of the rosette is that any gauge makes an angle of 45 degrees with the axis
of the shaft. However, given the small size and the curved surface of the shaft, it is
difficult to ensure that the angle is maintained.
c) The values of loads used in the experiment do not include the weight of the hanger and
the offset bar.
d) Plane cross sections do not remain plane after bending. The values of a and b would
have been affected.
e) All the above contributed to inaccurate readings which in turn causes an inaccurate
value of the Youngs Modulus, E, to be obtained. The Youngs Modulus is being used
to calculate the experimental stresses and hence will generate inaccurate values.

2. From the results of step (B5), deduce the type of strain the strain-meter readings
represent.

xy

1 2

sin 2

12

where subcripts 1 and 2 refer to the


cos2
2
2
2
direction of the gauge numbers 1 and 2 respectively.
Given that

Since = 45o, xy 1 2
Likewise, for gauge numbers 3 and 4, xy 4 3 .
Since a (1 4 ) ( 2 3 )
Rearranging,
a ( 1 4 ) ( 2 3 )
( 1 2 ) ( 4 3 )
2 xy
Thus, configuration a of the strain-meter will measure the shear strain experienced by the
specimen.

It was also given in the laboratory manual that


A yA xA yA
xy
1 x

cos2
sin 2
2
2
2
2 1 xA yA xy
or
where superscript A refers to the point A on the shaft.
At point A, xA

2 1 xy
1

Similarly at point B, Bx

2 4 xy
1

The bending strain at point A is then given by


( xA Bx ) 1 4
x

2
1
or
2 3 x (1 )
Likewise,

1 4 = x (1-)

b ( 1 2 ) ( 3 4 )
( 1 4 ) ( 2 3 )
2 x (1 )
Hence, configuration b of the strain-meter will measure the axial strain experienced by the
specimen.

Apart from the uniaxial tension method used in this experiment, how can the elastic
constants be determined.
Young's modulus can be worked out using the cantilever beam. In this method, weights are
hung from the beam successively at several locations along it. The resulting deflections can
wL3
be measured using a dial-gauge. The governing equation is v
where I is the second
3EI
moment of area, and which can be calculated easily from the dimensions of the beam.
We can vary v with L, plot a graph whose gradient represents the remaining terms, and from
the gradient, work out E.
TL
We can
GI
vary T with , plot a graph whose gradient represents the remaining terms, and from the
gradient, work out G.

Shear modulus can be found using the torsion test. The governing equation is

Poisson's Ratio v can be worked out using the expression with the values of E and G.

3.

Instead of using Equations (3) and (8) for strains, develop alternative equations
to enable the determination of strains from the four gauges readings.

Equations (3) and (8) made use of gauges 1 and 4 to determine strain. However, we can
actually choose to use gauges 2 and 3.
Given

xy
2

3 4
2

sin 2

34
2

cos2

substituting =-45o,
xy 3 4 .

Also

xA yA
2

xA yA
2

cos2

xy
2

sin 2

After simplifying,
2 2 xA yA xy
And since yA xA ,

xA

2 2 xy
1

Similarly for point B


2 xy
Bx 3
1
Hence, bending strain at A is given by
( A Bx ) 2 3
x x

2
1
Thus, the alternative equation to enable the determination of strains from the four gauges
readings,
b ( 1 2 ) ( 3 4 )

( 1 4 ) ( 2 3 )
2 x (1 )
( 4 ) ( 2 3 )
x 1
2(1 )
.

4.

Develop stress equations for combined bending, and twisting, of hollow shafts
with K as the ratio of inside to outside diameter.

The magnitude of the maximum bending stress at any point b of a hollow shaft of ratio of
inner to outer diameter K is given by

M xy
Iz

where M xy = bending moment of shaft


I z = the second moment of area
=

64

d 4 1 K 4

d
bP
2
d 4 1 K 4

64
32bP
=- 3
d 1 K 4

where d is the outer diameter of shaft, b is the distance of any point on the shaft to the point
of application of force and P is the applied force.

5.

In certain installations shafts may be subjected to an axial load F in addition to


torsional and bending loads. Would the strain gauge arrangement for this
experiment be acceptable to the determination of stresses?
Give reasons for your answer. For simplicity, a solid shaft may be
considered.

Axial load F will cause an increase in axial strain, which will be registered by the strain
gauge arrangement for the experiment. However, the readings taken will register the sum of
that due to both bending and tensile/compressive effects and it would not be possible to
determine the amount of strain contributed by each force. The axial stress determined will be
the resultant of that due to all the axial forces involved. In conclusion, the arrangement used
in the experiment is acceptable in determining the stresses experienced by the specimen.

Conclusion
The strain gauge technique provides a relatively accurate way of measuring the strains and
stresses in a shaft subjected to simultaneous bending and twisting. The bending and torsion
stresses were analysed through the use of St. Venants principle and the principle of
superpostition, and the stress components were determined through Hookes law equations.
However, the experimental and theoretical values of stresses differed, but within an
acceptable range. This is attributed to the presence of many sources of errors, which have

been aforementioned. All in all, the experimental set up has been proven to be effective and
quite accurate and the objectives of the experiment have been met.