CE3100 STR Lab Summer2018

CE 3100 Structural Engineering Lab
Summer 2018
Instructors:
Dr Alagappan Dr A Meher Prasad Dr S Arul Dr Arun Menon
Ponnalagu Jayachandran
(AP) (AMP) (SAJC) (AM)
VI Semester Slot – Jan-May 2018 (Summer)
Timings
Batch
Lab Report Lab Report
1 09:00 - 10:30 10:30 - 12:00 14:00 – 15:30 15:30 - 17:00
2 09:00 - 10:30 10:30 - 12:00 14:00 – 15:30 15:30 - 17:00
Experiments to be performed:
1. Behavior of under-reinforced concrete beams under flexure
2. Behavior of short reinforced concrete columns under axial compression
3. Behavior of reinforced concrete beams under shear
4. Behavior of reinforced concrete beams under torsion
5. Bending tests on rolled steel joists
6. Symmetrical and unsymmetrical bending
7. Torsion of closed and open sections
8. Plastic behavior of steel beams
9. Buckling of steel angles
10. Lateral buckling of steel H beams
11. Behavior of bolted connections
Demonstration Experiments:
1. Behavior of over-reinforced concrete beams under flexure
2. Bond strength tests
Schedule
Expt. 12-18 May 2018
# 12 12FN 12AN 13FN 13AN 14FN 14AN 15FN 15AN 16FN 16AN 17FN 17AN 18FN
1 A B C D E F G H I J K
Introduction to Experiments
Demonstration Experiment
2 B C D E F G H I J K A
& Repeat Experiments
3 C D E F G H I J K A B
4 D E F G H I J K A B C
Examination
5 E F G H I J K A B C D
6 F G H I J K A B C D E
7 G H I J K A B C D E F
8 H I J K A B C D E F G
9 I J K A B C D E F G H
10 J K A B C D E F G H I
11 K A B C D E F G H I J
Group Members
Faculty Member: SAJC Faculty Member: AM Faculty Member: AMP Faculty Member: AP
Team A1 Team D1 Team G1 Team I1
CE14B091 JAIKISHAN DULANI CE15B011 ARJUNA BHANU PRAKASH CE15B002 ADEPU SANATH KUMAR CE15B018 BUSAM ALEKHYA
CE15B009 ANKUR YADAV CE15B033 MALEPATI VISHWAK CE15B023 DONIPUDI SATYA SREE THILAK CE15B055 SAURABH KUMAR AGARWAL
CE15B062 VEMURI RAHUL CE15B078 KOLA SURYA CHANDRA CE15B046 PULI ROHIT RAHUL CE15B028 K KIRAN PRAKASH
CE15B052 S.S.K.SAI SHANDILIA
Team B1 Team E1 Team H1 Team J1
CE15B029 KANCHIBHOTLA KAMAKSHI SRAVYA CE15B051 ROSHAN MATHEW TOM CE15B031 K.S.S.S. SREE HARSHAVARDHAN CE15B040 NEETESH KUMAR MEENA
CE15B057 SOMAJI AJAY BHARGAV CE15B058 SUBRAMANIAN SHYAM SUNDAR CE15B027 JONNALAGADDA CHINMAYEE CE15B056 SINGAM SRAVAN GOUD
CE15B065 YADAVILLI SASHANK CE15B101 KANNAN NEHA RAJAN CE15B008 ANKITA MEENA CE15B015 BHRUGUMALLA SWAPNIKA
CE15B038 NALIGALA JESWANTH CE15B088 RICKY RAO
Team C1 Team F1 Team K1
CE15B036 MUDAVATH RAVINDER CE15B060 TIRUMALASETTY SRI LATHA CE15B066 ADITYA PUSHKAR RANADE
CE15B084 NOOKALA HARSHA VARDHAN CE15B026 INDUPURU BALA SUDEEP REDDY CE15B017 BOLLAPALLY CHETHANA
CE15B068 AJAY KUMAR MEENA CE15B093 SUNIL KUMAR CE15B064 VIVEK V
CE15B095 UTTAM CHAUHAN CE15B073 G CHINMAI SRI VISHNU
Team A2 Team D2 Team G2 Team I2
CE15B034 MOHIT KUMAR MEENA CE15B044 POTNURU NIKHIL CE15B005 AMAN SIDDHANT PATLE CE15B004 AMAN HINGERH
CE15B089 RISHAB JAIN CE15B080 KORRA SAI RAM NAIK CE15B105 DASVIND VERMA CE15B043 POTHURAJU HARSHA VARDHAN
CE15B059 THUNIKI VISHWAS REDDY CE15B007 AMOD SHANKER CE15B087 PRAJWAL M CE15B069 AKKALDEVI ROSHINI
CE15B082 MALAPATI LIKHITHA
Team B2 Team E2 Team H2 Team J2
CE15B103 AKSHAT SHARMA CE15B042 PATHIVADA SINDHUJA CE15B010 ANSHU MEENA CE15B099 PRAN KRISHNA
CE15B094 UTKARSH MURARI CE15B067 AJAY CE15B048 R RISHI VIGNESHWAR CE15B086 PARTHIK SHILPESH SHAH
CE15B039 NARAIN M CE15B012 ASHRITH NALLI CE15B104 KULDEEP SINGH CE15B080 KORRA SAI RAM NAIK
CE15B077 J.S.KIRAN ROY
Team C2 Team F2 Team K2
CE15B102 NIHAL K CE15B050 RAYUDU ABHIRAM CE15B074 GODAVARTHI SAIKIRAN

CE15B030 KARTHIK CE15B003 AKASH RAMACHANDRAN NAIR CE15B037 MUTTEVI DIVYA PRANEETHA
CE15B092 SHASHWAT JAIN CE15B071 ANURAG KUMAR CE15B096 VARUN CHOUDHARY
Course Evaluation
1. Session Assessment : 60%
(Group work; Individual report)
2. Final Examination : 40%
General Instructions
1. Always come to the laboratory on time. Shoes are compulsory.
2. Come well-prepared for the experiments. You must bring relevant codes
applicable for concrete/steel code and steel sections hand book.
3. Maintain a separate observation notebook. Show the observations and get the
instructor’s signature before you leave the lab after the experiment. A scanned
copy of this page/s must accompany the lab report for each experiment.
4. Members of Group 1 will work on the report, after the lab in DCF, on the same day
and submit the completed report (individual submissions on MOODLE). Members
of Group 2 will work on the report during prior to the lab.
5. Reports should be neatly typed and should be uploaded on the MOODLE site.
6. The report should contain: the title, detailed analysis of experimental data,
tabulation of observations, comparison of theoretical prediction with
experimental observation, results and most importantly, discussion of the results
and inference.
7. Copying of report will earn zero credits for those involved.
8. End-Semester Exam is written and a minimum of 50% in the examination is
required to pass the course.
Expt # 1. Behaviour of reinforced concrete beams under
flexure
Aim:
To study the flexural behaviour of reinforced concrete beams.
Details of test specimen:

Provide a neat sketch of each test specimen, along with its dimensions and
reinforcement.
All dimensions in mm.
Apparatus used:
List the apparatus used in the experiment and describe them briefly
Background:
 Brief description of the response of the reinforced concrete beams under flexure
o Behaviour of singly reinforced beams – Under-reinforced, over-reinforced,
balanced sections
o Behaviour of doubly reinforced beams
 Assumptions in the flexure theory for reinforced concrete beams and their
implications
 Brief derivation of the cracking and ultimate moments for singly reinforced
sections
o Cracking moment M cr  0.12bD 2 f ck
Here, the mean cube compressive strength of concrete can be substituted for
fck (in MPa); b, D (in mm) are the width and depth of the beam, respectively
o Ultimate moment of resistance M uR  0.54 f ck bxu(d  0.42 xu )
f y As
o For an under-reinforced beam, xu 
0.54 f ck b
o For an over-reinforced beam,
12  10 6 (As E s )2  7.56  10 3 As E s bdf ck  0.0035 As E s
xu 
1.08bf ck
The material safety factors are neglected.
 Obtain the ultimate moment of resistance for doubly reinforced section
Sketch of experimental setup:

Neat sketch of the setup showing the location of the steel pellets, dial gauge, point of
application of the loads, support condition.
Test specimen DEMEC points
Dial gauges
Experimental Setup
Secondary
compression failure
MuR
Yield of tension steel
(at yielding moment)
Moment (M)
First crack (at cracking moment)
Curvature (φ)
Moment vs. curvature for an under-reinforced section
Compression failure
MuR
Moment (M)
First crack (at cracking moment)
Curvature (φ)
Moment vs. curvature for an over-reinforced section

Procedure:
List the procedure followed to collect the required data.
Observation:
1. Table – 1: Readings from the DEMEC gauges at various locations – Under-

reinforced beam
Load DEMEC gauge reading (mm)
(kg) 1 2 3 4 5
2. Table – 2: Readings from the dial gauges and crack width – Under-reinforced
beam
Load Crack Raw Dial Gauge Reading (mm)

(kg) width 1 2 3
(mm) Main Vern Main Vern Main Vern
3. Table – 3: Readings from the DEMEC gauge at various locations – Over

reinforced beam
(kg) 1 2 3 4 5
4. Table – 4: Readings from the dial gauge and crack width – Over reinforced beam
Load Crack Raw Dial Gauge Reading (mm)

(kg) width 1 2 3
(mm) Main Vern Main Vern Main Vern
5. Figure – 1: Sketch of Crack pattern Under reinforced beam:
6. Figure – 2: Sketch of Crack pattern Over reinforced beam:
Detailed Calculations:
1. Table – 5: The value of the strains at various locations – Under reinforced beam
Load Strain (×10-6)

(kg) 1 2 3 4 5
2. Table – 6: Deflections at various locations – Under reinforced beam
Load Observed Deflection (mm) Theoretical Deflection (mm)

(kg) 1 2 3 1 2 3
3. Table – 7: The value of the strains at various locations – Over reinforced beam
Load Strain (×10-6)

(kg) 1 2 3 4 5
4. Table – 8: Deflections at various locations – Over reinforced beam
Load Observed Deflection (mm) Theoretical Deflection (mm)

(kg) 1 2 3 1 2 3
5. Table – 9: Various quantities computed from strains tabulated in Tables 5 and 7.
Under reinforced beam Over reinforced beam

Load Moment Curvature, Depth Load Moment Curvature, Depth
(kg) (Nm)  of NA (kg) (Nm)  of NA
(mm) (mm)
6. Figure – 3: Plot of depth vs. strain for various loads

7. Figure – 4: Plot of load vs. deflection (3 curves, compare theoretical predictions
with experimentally obtained values)
8. Figure – 5: Plot of moment vs. curvature
9. Figure – 6: Plot of moment vs. depth of neutral axis (NA)
10. Figure – 7: Plot of load vs. crack width
11. Compare the response of under reinforced vs. over reinforced beams in the above
plots and describe the qualitative difference in their response
12. Compare the predicted and observed ultimate capacity and cracking moment.
Discussion:
Comment on the results obtained and the observed vs. expected behaviour.
Expt # 2. Behaviour of axially loaded short column
Aim:
To study the behaviour of axially loaded short reinforced concrete column.

Provide a neat sketch of the test specimen along with its dimensions and relevant
geometric properties
Apparatus used:
Background:
 Brief description of the response of reinforced concrete columns
o Behaviour of a short column
o Behaviour of an eccentrically loaded column
 Assumptions in the analysis of reinforced concrete columns and its implications
 Brief derivation of the ultimate axial load capacity of short column
o Ultimate axial load, Pu0 = 0.67fckAc + fscAsc
fsc = 0.85fy, approximate stress corresponding to a strain of 0.002

 Discuss the role of lateral ties and modes of failure of the column.

Neat sketch of the setup showing the location of the steel pellets and loading.
P
225
950
3 @ 200
225
Experimental Setup
Procedure:
Observation:
1. Table – 1: Readings from the DEMEC gauge at various locations
(kg) Face A Face B Face C Face D
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
2. Figure – 1: Sketch of crack pattern on the four faces of the column:
Face A Face B Face C Face D

1. Table – 2: The value of the strains at various locations
Load Strain at various locations (×10-6)

(kg) Face A Face B Face C Face D
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
2. Figure – 2: Plot of load vs. mean strain (Compare theoretical prediction with
that observed experimentally)
3. Figure – 3: Plot of load vs. strain at level – 1 for various faces
6. Figure – 6: Plot of load vs. strain at various levels in face – A
7. Figure – 7: Plot of load vs. strain at various levels in face – B
8. Figure – 8: Plot of load vs. strain at various levels in face – C
9. Figure – 9: Plot of load vs. strain at various levels in face – D
In Figures 3 to 9, plot the mean strains as well.
Discussion:
Comment on the observed vs. expected behaviour, the nature of the moments on the
column (if any), variation of strains at various levels of a given face and crack pattern.
Expt # 3. Behaviour of reinforced concrete beams under shear
Aim:
To study the behaviour of beams under shear, with and without shear reinforcement.

Provide a neat sketch of the test specimen along with its dimensions and geometric
properties.
Apparatus used:
List the apparatus used in the experiment and describe them briefly.
Background:
 Brief description of the response of reinforced concrete beams under shear
1. Behaviour of a beam without shear reinforcement
2. Behaviour of a beam with shear reinforcement
 Brief review of shear strength of reinforced concrete beams.
1. Design strength of a beam without shear reinforcement:
τc 
0.85 0.8 f ck  
1  5 β 1
6β
0.8 f ck
Where β  or 1 whichever is greater.
6.89 pt
Shear strength Vc = τc bd.
2. Design strength of a beam with shear reinforcement:

Shear strength VuR = Vc + Vs
Where Vc = shear resisted by concrete
Vs= shear resisted by stirrups.
f y Asv d
Vs 
sv
 Discuss the typical shear failure modes in RC beams.

Neat sketch of the setup showing the location of steel pellets, dial gauge, point of
application of the load, support conditions.
Experimental Setup
150
200
6 stirrups
25
(3) 16
Cross-section
(All dimensions in mm)
Procedure:
Observations:
1. Table – 1: Readings from the dial gauge – beam without shear reinforcement
Load (kg) Dial gauge reading (mm)
2. Table – 2: Readings from the DEMEC gauge – beam without shear

reinforcement
DEMEC gauge reading
Load (kg)
Diag 1 Diag 2
3. Table – 3: Readings from the dial gauge – beam with shear reinforcement
Load (kg) Dial gauge reading (mm)
4. Table – 4: Readings from the DEMEC gauge – beam with shear reinforcement
DEMEC gauge reading
Load (kg)
Diag 1 Diag 2
5. Figure - 1: Sketch of crack pattern
1. Table – 5 : Deflections – beam without shear reinforcement
Load (kg) Deflection (mm)
2. Table – 6 : Deflections – beam with shear reinforcement

Load (kg) Deflection (mm)
3. Table – 7 : Values of average shear stress and shear strain

Load Shear stress Strain (1) Strain (2) Shear Strain
2
(kg) (N/mm )
4. Figure -2: Plot of load vs. deflection for both the cases
5. Figure -3: Plot of shear stress vs. shear strain for both the cases
6. Compare the deflection responses of the beams, with and without shear
reinforcement
Discussions:
Comment on the results obtained and the observed vs. expected behaviour.
Expt # 4. Behaviour of reinforced concrete beams under torsion
Aim:
To study the behaviour of beam under pure torsion.

properties
Apparatus used:
Background:
 Brief description of various types of torsion in reinforced concrete beams.

 Comment on cracking and ultimate torque.
 Relevant code provisions.
1. Cracking torsion moment (torque),

b2  b
Tcr  τt ,max D 
2 3
Where τt ,max  0.2 f ck .

b = width of the beam, in mm
D = depth of the beam, in mm
fck = characteristic compressive strength of concrete in N/mm2.
Use mean strength instead of characteristic strength.
2. Ultimate torsional moment: When only the ties yield before failure
Af
TuR  2b1d1 t yt
sv
Where
At = area of cross-section of one leg of stirrup
b1 = shorter distance between longitudinal bars
d1 = longer distance between longitudinal bars
fyt = yield strength of transverse steel
sv = spacing of stirrups.
Neat sketch of the setup showing the location of steel pellets, dial gauge, point of
application of the load, support conditions.
Experimental Setup
150
200
6 stirrups
25
(4) 12
Cross-section
(All dimensions in mm)
Procedure:
Observations:
1. Figure - 1: Sketch the crack pattern
Bottom
surface
Rear
surface
Top
surface
Front
surface
2. Table – 1: Readings from dial gauges.
Load Readings of Readings of

(kg) Dial Gauge 1 Dial Gauge 2
1. Cracking torque,Tcr.
2. Ultimate torsional moment TuR
3. Table – 2: Calculation of angle of twist from experimental data.
Net Angle of
Load Torque
deflection twist
(kg) (kN-m)
(mm) (rad)
4. Figure -2: Plot of torque vs. angle of twist
Discussions:
Comment on the results obtained and the behaviour observed.
Expt # 5. Bending tests on steel rolled joists
Aim:
To study the bending behavior of steel rolled joists.

properties.
Apparatus used:
Background:
 Assumptions in the theory of beam bending and its implications for this
experiment
 Brief derivation of the flexure formula
 Theoretical estimate of the shear stresses at neutral axis of I – section
 List the methods available to determine the deflection of a beam
 Obtain an equation for the deflected shape of a simply supported beam subjected
to two-point loading
 Theory of strain-rosette – Expressions to determine the components of the strain
tensor, principal strains and principal direction
Neat sketch of the setup showing the location of the strain gauges, dial gauge, point of
application of the loads, support condition and the orientation of the chosen
coordinate system
Procedure:
List the procedure followed to collect the required data
Observation:
7. Table – 1: Readings from the strain gauge at various locations
Load, Raw Strain Gauge Reading, (*10-6)
kg 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
8. Table – 2: Readings from the dial gauge

Load, Raw Dial Gauge Reading, (mm)
kg 1 2 3
Main Vern Main Vern Main Vern
Load, Strain, (*10-6)
kg 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
14. Table – 4: Deflections at various locations

Load, Deflection, (mm)
kg 1 2 3
15. Table – 5: Various quantities computed from strains tabulated in Table – 3.
Load, Moment, Curvature, Depth Principal Principal Shear strain
kg Nm  of NA, strain @ loc 2 direction @ loc 3 from
mm  1p  p2 @ loc 2, 9 10

16. Figure – 1: Plot of depth vs. strain for various loads

17. Figure – 2: Plot of load vs. deflection (3 curves)
18. Figure – 3: Plot of moment vs. curvature
19. Figure – 4: Plot of moment vs. depth of neutral axis
20. Figure – 5: Plot of load vs. principal direction
21. Figure – 6: Plot of load vs. shear strain (2 curves)
22. Estimate the flexural rigidity from:
a. Load vs. deflection curve (3 values)
b. Moment vs. curvature curve
23. Compute the theoretical flexural rigidity and compare it with that obtained
in the experiment
24. Estimate the shear rigidity from the load vs. shear strain plot and compare
it with the theoretical value
Discussion:
Comment on the results obtained and the observed vs. expected behavior.
Expt # 6. Symmetrical and unsymmetrical Bending
Aim: To study the behavior of a section subjected to symmetrical and unsymmetrical
bending

properties
Apparatus used:
Background:
 Assumptions in the theory of beam bending and its implications for this
experiment
 Conditions under which we can superpose solutions and its applicability for this
experiment
 Brief derivation of the flexure formula for unsymmetrical bending
 Obtain an equation for the deflected shape of a simply supported beam subjected
to one-point loading
application of the loads, support condition
Procedure:
Observation:
9. Table – 1: Readings from strain gauge at various locations – Symmetrical bending
kg 1 2 3
10. Table – 2: Readings from the dial gauge – Symmetrical bending

kg x y
Main Vern Main Vern
11. Table – 3: Readings from strain gauge at various locations – Unsymmetrical

bending
kg 1 2 3
12. Table – 4: Readings from the dial gauge – Unsymmetrical bending

kg x y
Main Vern Main Vern
25. Table – 5: The value of the strains at various locations – Symmetrical bending
Load, Observed Strain, (*10-6) Theoretical Strain, (*10-6)
kg 1 2 3 1 2 3
26. Table – 6: Deflections at various locations – Symmetrical bending

Load, Observed Displacement, (mm) Theoretical Displacement, (mm)
kg x y x y
27. Table – 7: The value of the strains at various locations – Unsymmetrical bending
Load, Observed Strain, (*10-6) Theoretical Strain, (*10-6)
kg 1 2 3 1 2 3
28. Table – 8: Deflections at various locations – Unsymmetrical bending

Load, Observed Displacement, (mm) Theoretical Displacement, (mm)
kg x y x y
29. Figure – 1: Plot of load vs. theoretical and observed displacement along x –
direction for both symmetrical and unsymmetrical bending
30. Figure – 2: Plot of load vs. theoretical and observed displacement along y –
direction for both symmetrical and unsymmetrical bending
31. Figure – 3: Plot of load vs. theoretical and observed axial strain at location 1 for
both symmetrical and unsymmetrical bending
Discussion:
Comment on the results obtained and the observed vs. expected behavior.
Expt # 7. Torsion of closed and open sections
Aim:
To compare and study the behavior of a closed and open section subjected to torsion

Provide a neat sketch of the test specimens along with its dimensions and relevant
geometric properties
Apparatus used:
Background:
 Definition of open and closed section
 Brief description of the theories of Torsion – Coulomb theory and St. Venant’s
theory
 Assumptions in the theories of torsion and its implications
 z T
 Brief derivation of the expression:    for closed sections
r J
 For circular tube with a slit along the meridian subjected to a pure torque, T:
T  sinh(x) 
 3 
 (l  x)  tanh(l ) 
cosh(l ) 
,
ECw  
T  cosh( x)  T  sinh( x) 
'  1  cosh( l )  ,  ' '   EC   cosh( l )  ,
ECw  2   w  
T  cosh( x)  G t2
 '''   2

ECw  cosh( l ) 
, where is the angle of twist, ,
E r 4 ( 2  6)
2 2
Cw  (  6)tr 5 , E = 71 GPa, G = 27 GPa, l is the length of the tube, x is
3
the distance measured from the torque applied end, t is the thickness of the
tube, r is the mean radius of the tube. The only non-zero components of the
stress in cylindrical polar coordinates are:
 2 
 z  tG 'r 3 2(1  cos( ))   E ' ' ' ,  zz  r 2 (  2 sin( ))E ' ' , where 
 2
varies from   to +  (   at split end); = 0 at exactly opposite to split end.
 Derive the expressions for the principal strain for the above state of stress,
assuming the material obeys Hooke’s law with Young’s Modulus, E (= 71 GPa)
and Poisson ratio,  ( 0.32) . Also, obtain an expression for the principal direction
with respect to a fixed Cartesian coordinate basis for the above state of stress.

Neat sketch of the setup showing the location of the strain gauges, orientation of the
chosen coordinate system and loading
Procedure:
Observation:
13. Table – 1: Readings from the strain gauge at various locations for open section
Load, Raw Strain gauge reading
kg Location 1 Location 2
0o 45o 90o 0o 45o 90o
14. Table – 2: Rotation at various locations for open section

Load, Rotation (degrees)
15. Table – 3: Readings from the strain gauge at the given location for closed section
Load, Raw Strain gauge reading
kg 0o 45o 90o
16. Table – 4: Rotation at various locations for closed section

Load, Rotation (degrees)
1. Table – 5: Strains at various locations for open section
Load, Strains (*10-6)
o o o o
0 45 90 0 45o 90o
2. Table – 6: Comparison of strains at various locations for open section

Torque, Location – 1 Location – 1 Location – 2 Location – 2
Nm (Observed) (Calculated) (Observed) (Calculated)
Principal Principal Principal Principal
direction.
direction.
direction.
Principal
Principal
Principal
Principal
direction
strain strain strain strain

 1p  p2  1p  p2  1p  p2  1p  p2
3. Table – 7: Rotation at various locations for open section

Load, Torque, Observed Rotation (deg.) Calculated Rotation (deg.)
kg Nm Location 1 Location 2 Location 1 Location 2
4. Table – 8: Strains at the given location for closed section

Load, Strains (*10-6)
kg 0o 45o 90o
5. Table – 9: Comparison of strains at various locations for closed section
Torque, Location – 1 Location – 1
Nm (Observed) (Calculated)
Principal Principal
direction.
Principal
Principal
direction
strain strain
 1p  p2  1p  p2
6. Table – 10: Rotation at various locations for closed section

Load, Torque, Observed Rotation (deg.) Calculated Rotation (deg.)
kg Nm Location 1 Location 2 Location 1 Location 2
7. Figure – 1: Torque vs. angle of twist per unit length for closed and open section
8. Figure – 2: Torque vs. principal direction for open section
9. Figure – 3: Torque vs. major principal strain for open section
10. Figure – 4: Torque vs. minor principal strain for open section
11. Figure – 5: Torque vs. principal direction for closed section
12. Figure – 6: Torque vs. major principal strain for closed section
13. Figure – 7: Torque vs. minor principal strain for closed section
 Figures 2 to 4 contains 2 curves corresponding to different locations
Discussion:
Comment on the observed vs. expected behavior and the results obtained.
Expt # 8. Plastic Behaviour of Steel Beams
Aim:
To study the plastic behavior of steel beams and to determine the collapse load of the
beam.

properties
Apparatus used:
Background:
 Brief description of the plastic theory and its importance in steel construction.
 Brief description of the plastic hinge concept and plastic collapse load
 Brief derivation of the formula for finding the plastic moment capacity of a
propped cantilever with a concentrated load.
Experimental setup and procedure:

coordinate system
c P d Q
B
A C
a b
L
A square rod of span L is restrained against translation and rotation at one end (A) and
against vertical translation at the other end (C). It is subjected to a concentrated load
at B, at a distance ‘a’ from the rotationally restrained end. A pair of strain gauges at
top and bottom fibres are provided at sections P and Q at distance ‘c’ and ‘d ‘ from A
and B respectively. A load cell is provided at C to measure the vertical reaction at the
right support. A dial gauge is located at B to measure vertical deflection.
The load is applied at point B from a hanger rod at 10 kg increments. All the readings
(strain gauges, load cell and dial gauge) are taken after each load increment. The
increment in load is reduced to 5 kg closer to failure load in order to obtain failure
load accurately and more readings closer to the failure load. Failure is indicated by
large increase in deformation and continuous increase in deformation with time.
After failure take a piece from the undisturbed portion and do tension test to obtain
the yield strength of the material.
1. Measure the cross-section of the rod at several places with a Vernier and also
determine the span and the load position with a scale.
2. Calculate the expected collapse load by assuming the mechanism and by drawing
the bending moment diagram at collapse. Assume mild steel of yield strength 250
MPa.
3. Apply the load by means of weights and note the reaction as well as strains and
deflections.
4. In the tension test, note the failure mode and the yield and ultimate stresses and
the corresponding strains.
Observation:
1. Table – 1: Readings from the load cell and strain gauges
Load, Load cell Strain gauge readings

kg readings
At P At Q
Top Bottom Top Bottom
2. Table – 2: Readings from the dial gauge below the load
Load Raw Dial Gauge reading (mm)

Kg.
Main Vern
kg
At P At Q
Top Bottom Top Bottom
2. Table – 4: Deflection at B
Load, Observed Theoretical
kg Deflection, (mm) Deflection, (mm)
3. Table – 5: Reaction at C
Load, Observed Theoretical
kg Reaction Reaction
4. Table – 6: Bending moment at A and B

Bending moment at A Bending moment at B
Elastic Based on Based on Elastic Based on Based on
Load, kg
analysis Strains observed analysis Strains observed
reaction reaction
5. Figure – 1: Experimental and theoretical load versus deflection plots

identifying the yield and ultimate load levels
6. Figure – 2: Experimental and theoretical load versus reactions plots
7. Figure – 3: Load versus moment at A (3 curves)
8. Figure – 4: Load versus moment at B (3 curves)
9. Compare the yield and collapse loads obtained from the test with the
predictions.
Discussion:
Comment on the results obtained and the observed versus expected behavior.
Expt # 9. Buckling Strength of Concentrically Loaded Angle struts
Aim:
To study the buckling behavior and to determine the limit point load and the
elastic buckling load (Pcr) of single and double angle steel compression members, and
to compare with the theoretical values obtained from Euler’s equation.
Single and double angle column specimens (20mm×20mm×3mm)
8.35mm
20 mm
20 mm
20 mm 20 mm
20 mm
Apparatus used:
 Single and double angle column specimens (20mmx20mmx3mm)

 Steel scale
 Dial gauges (L.C= 0.01mm)
 Vernier calipers (L.C= 0.02mm)
 Two hemi-spheres
 Plumb bob
 Plate with circular groove
Background:
 Assumptions in the theory of Euler’s theory and its implications for this
experiment
 Brief derivation of the Euler’s Buckling equation
 Brief description of the effect of initial imperfections, residual stresses and
eccentricity on the buckling load capacity of columns
 Brief description about Southwell’s Plot.

coordinate system
Hydraulic Jack
Horizontal Beam of Self-Straining

Frame
Piston for Application of Vertical Load

Semi Hemispherical Iron Piece
Test Specimen
Dial Gauges (1 & 2)
End Plates
Concrete Pedestal
Test Floor
Fig. Experimental Setup for Compression testing of members
Procedure:
Observation:
Table – 1: Single angle under uniaxial compression
Table 1: Calculation for Single Angle Strut
Load(P) Dial Gage Reading Deflection Deflection/Load

Sl. No.
Micron kg D1 D2 d1 (mm) d2 (mm) d1/P (mm/kg)
Double angle under uniaxial compression

Table 2: Calculation for Double Angle Strut
Dial Gage
Load Deflection
Sl. No. Reading Deflection/Load
d1/P (mm/kg)
Micron kg D1 D2 d1 (mm) d2 (mm)
10. Figure – 1: Load versus maximum lateral displacement

11. Figure – 2: Southwell plot of P versus δ/P to obtain the critical load
12. Compare experimental results with the code (IS 800 – 2007) provisions
and comment on the discrepancy if any.
Discussion:
Comment on the observed versus expected behavior and the results obtained.
Expt # 10. Lateral Buckling of Steel I Beams
Aim:
To study the lateral buckling behaviour of steel I-beams and to determine the critical
moment.

Provide a neat sketch of the test specimens along with its dimensions and relevant
geometric properties.
Apparatus used:
Background:
 Description of lateral- torsional buckling of beams
 Brief Description of Southwell plot.
 Lateral buckling strength Mcr ( IS: 800 - 2007)
 2 EI y   2 EI w 
M cr   t
GI  
( KL ) 2  ( KL ) 2 
where,
E = Young’s modulus =2 x 105 MPa; G = Shear modulus =0.769 ×105 MPa
Iy = Moment of inertia about the weak axis in (mm4)
hf = Center to center distance between the flanges in mm
KL = Effective laterally unsupported length of the member in mm
ry = Radius of gyration of the section about the weak axis in mm
b t3
It = St.Venant’s torsion constant =  i i (for open cross section)
3
Iw = Warping constant = 1   f  f I y hy ; (  f  0.5 for I section ,hy = (d - tf )
2
Using Mcr, the nominal bending strength of laterally unsupported beam as

governed by lateral torsional buckling can be calculated as follows using mo = 1.0
M d   b Z p f bd 
f bd   LT f y /  mo  LT  0.5 1   ( LT  0.2)   LT
2

   bZ p f y
 1 
 LT   0.5 
 1.0  
 LT 
 LT
2
  2 LT  
LT
M cr
αLT = Imperfection factor = 0.21 for rolled steel section

For top flange loading the code recommends an increase in effective length by 20%.

Neat sketch of the setup showing the location of the strain gauges, orientation of the
chosen coordinate system and loading
Procedure:
Two simply supported I-sections (ISMB 100) are loaded by a concentrated load at
their mid-span using weights on a hanger. The vertical and lateral deflections are
measured using circular dial gauges. One is loaded at the level of the top flange and
the other is loaded at its centroidal axis level.
1. Calculate the nominal bending strength for both beams (code value).
2. Practice reading the dial gauges by slackening the string (do not pull the strings)
and identify its least count.
3. Carryout the test by applying the load in increments of 40 kg and recording the
dial gauge readings.
4. Note or take a picture of the buckling mode from one end of the beam.
Observation:
3. Table – 1: Readings from the Dial gauges
Load, Dial gauge readings
kg Vertical Horizontal
14. Table – 2 Vertical and lateral deflections
Load, Deflections (mm)

kg Vertical Horizontal
15. Figure – 1: Load versus lateral displacement

16. Figure – 2: Southwell plot of W versus delta/W to obtain the critical moment
4. Compare experimental results with the code (IS 800 – 2007) provisions and
comment on the discrepancy if any.
Discussion:
Comment on the observed versus expected behavior and the results obtained.
Expt # 11. Behaviour of Bolted connections
Aim:
To study the different failure modes and to determine the capacity of the given bolted
connections.

properties
Apparatus used:
Background:
 Brief description about different types of bolts
 Brief description of different types of bolted connections and their behaviour.
 Brief derivation of the formula for finding out their strength.

coordinate system
Procedure:
Two lap joints are to be tested. In the first test, a single bearing bolt is put on one side
of a double cover plate lap connection. The grade of the bolt is indicated on its head.
The thickness of the connecting plates is to be noted. As the load is increased, the
elongation is measured by dial gauges. Strain in the plates is also measured by means
of dial gauges. The bolt usually fails under double shear.
In the second test, high strength friction grip bolts are used. These are pre-tensioned to
the proof stress by the turn-of-the-nut method wherein 3/4th of a turn is given after the
snug tight condition. The increase in the length of the bolt will be by 3/4th of the pitch.
This can be used to calculate the force in the bolt. The lap connection is the tested as
before and the failure is usually by slip followed by the rupture of the section.
Observation:
Bearing Bolt
4. Table – 1: Readings from the dial gauge at various locations
Load, Dial Gauge Reading, (mm)

kg
1 2 3 4
Friction Grip bolt
5. Table – 2: Readings from the dial gauge

Load, Dial Gauge Reading, (mm)
kg
1 2 3 4
kg 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
14. Figure – 1: Load versus deflection curve for both the cases
15. Calculate the capacity of the bearing bolt in shear and in bearing, and
compare with the observed capacity.
16. Obtain the slip and net section rupture capacities, and compare with the
observed values. The load-slip graph for the bolt can be obtained from
experiment.
Discussion:
Comment on the results obtained and the observed versus expected behavior
Demo # 1. Bond Strength Tests
Aim:
1 To plot the load versus slip curves for the loaded and free ends in each
specimen
2 To record the loads at slips of 0.025 mm at the free end and 0.25 mm at the
loaded end of the in each specimen
3 To record the maximum load at failure and type of failure for each specimen
4 To compare the bond strengths of the two types of reinforcing bars
5 To record the cube strength
properties
Apparatus used:
Background:
 Brief description of various types of bond in reinforced concrete members.

 Brief description of the mechanisms by which bond resistance is mobilized in
reinforced concrete.
 Describe the factors affecting the bond strength
 Comment on the significance of development length
 Comment on load at which slipping occurs
 Relevant code provisions.
Bond Stress  Pe /(πΦl )
Where Pe = Load at which slip occurred

Ф = Diameter of rod used
l = Length of embedment

Neat sketch of the test setup
Procedure:
Observations:
1. Cube Strength of Concrete

2. Table – 1 : Readings from dial gauge for deformed bar
Load ( kg) Dial Gauge Readings in mm
at loaded end 1 at loaded end 2 at free end
3. Table – 2 : Readings from dial gauge for plain bar

Load ( kg) Dial Gauge Readings in mm
at loaded end at free end
1. Table – 3 : Bond stress in deformed bar
Average slip at Slip at free end in Bond stress in

Load in kg
loaded end in mm mm N/mm2
2. Table – 4 : Bond stress in plain bar
Slip at loaded end in Slip at free end in Bond stress in

Load in kg
mm mm N/mm2
3. Figure -1: Plot of load vs slip for deformed bar

4. Figure -2: Plot of load vs slip for plain bar
5. Load at slip of 0.025 mm at free end for
a) Plain bar
b) Deformed bar
6. Load at slip of 0.25 mm at loaded end for
c) Plain bar
d) Deformed bar
7. Maximum load at failure for
e) Plain bar
f) Deformed bar
Discussions:
Comment on the results and the behavior observed.

CE3100 STR Lab Summer2018

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

CE3100 STR Lab Summer2018

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

CE 3100 Structural Engineering Lab

VI Semester Slot – Jan-May 2018 (Summer)

Team B1 Team E1 Team H1 Team J1

Team C1 Team F1 Team K1

Team A2 Team D2 Team G2 Team I2

Team B2 Team E2 Team H2 Team J2

Team C2 Team F2 Team K2

CE15B102 NIHAL K CE15B050 RAYUDU ABHIRAM CE15B074 GODAVARTHI SAIKIRAN

Details of test specimen:

All dimensions in mm.

Sketch of experimental setup:

Test specimen DEMEC points

First crack (at cracking moment)

Moment vs. curvature for an under-reinforced section

First crack (at cracking moment)

Moment vs. curvature for an over-reinforced section

1. Table – 1: Readings from the DEMEC gauges at various locations – Under-

Load Crack Raw Dial Gauge Reading (mm)

3. Table – 3: Readings from the DEMEC gauge at various locations – Over

Load Crack Raw Dial Gauge Reading (mm)

5. Figure – 1: Sketch of Crack pattern Under reinforced beam:

6. Figure – 2: Sketch of Crack pattern Over reinforced beam:

Load Strain (×10-6)

2. Table – 6: Deflections at various locations – Under reinforced beam

Load Observed Deflection (mm) Theoretical Deflection (mm)

Load Strain (×10-6)

4. Table – 8: Deflections at various locations – Over reinforced beam

Load Observed Deflection (mm) Theoretical Deflection (mm)

5. Table – 9: Various quantities computed from strains tabulated in Tables 5 and 7.

Under reinforced beam Over reinforced beam

6. Figure – 3: Plot of depth vs. strain for various loads

Details of test specimen:

fsc = 0.85fy, approximate stress corresponding to a strain of 0.002

Sketch of experimental setup:

2. Figure – 1: Sketch of crack pattern on the four faces of the column:

Face A Face B Face C Face D

1. Table – 2: The value of the strains at various locations

Load Strain at various locations (×10-6)

Details of test specimen:

2. Design strength of a beam with shear reinforcement:

 Discuss the typical shear failure modes in RC beams.

Sketch of experimental setup:

2. Table – 2: Readings from the DEMEC gauge – beam without shear

5. Figure - 1: Sketch of crack pattern

2. Table – 6 : Deflections – beam with shear reinforcement

3. Table – 7 : Values of average shear stress and shear strain

Details of test specimen:

 Brief description of various types of torsion in reinforced concrete beams.

1. Cracking torsion moment (torque),

Where τt ,max  0.2 f ck .

2. Table – 1: Readings from dial gauges.

Load Readings of Readings of

4. Figure -2: Plot of torque vs. angle of twist

Details of test specimen:

8. Table – 2: Readings from the dial gauge

14. Table – 4: Deflections at various locations

16. Figure – 1: Plot of depth vs. strain for various loads

Details of test specimen:

10. Table – 2: Readings from the dial gauge – Symmetrical bending

11. Table – 3: Readings from strain gauge at various locations – Unsymmetrical

12. Table – 4: Readings from the dial gauge – Unsymmetrical bending

26. Table – 6: Deflections at various locations – Symmetrical bending

28. Table – 8: Deflections at various locations – Unsymmetrical bending

Details of test specimen: