Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 30

ABSTRACT

The engineers bending formula is only applicable to sections bent about its principal axes. For other cases, we have to use the generalized bending equation. This generalized bending equation makes use of the assumption that plane section before bending will still be a plane even after bending. The other assumption is that the material obeys the idealized Hookes Law. This equation is applicable to all sections regardless their geometry and their load direction.

Page | 1

1. OBJECTVES The objectives of this project are to verify the generalized bending theory by applying it in an experiment and to increase students knowledge on some features of unsymmetrical bending. 2. THEORY The EulerBernoulli beam equation or better known as the Generalized Bending Equation is the means of calculating the load-carrying and deflection characteristics of beams. It is largely used when the section bending is not about its principle axes, such as unsymmetrical bending. The load-stress formula can be derive by assuming that the equilibrium equations, compatibility conditions and the stress-strain relations (Hooks law) be satisfied. And that the plane section before bending remains plane after bending. 2.1 Equilibrium Equation The application of the equation of equilibrium to the free body in Figure 7.9b yields:

0 = ZZ A Mx = yZZ A My = - xZZ A
Eq 1.1 where

ZZ is the normal stress in the beam due to bending

A denotes an element of area in the cross section x = the perpendicular distance to the centroidal y-axis y = the perpendicular distance to the centroidal x-axis My = the bending moment about the y-axis

Mx = the bending moment about the x-axis

Page | 2

2.2 Geometry Deformation(Strain) By considering two plane cross-section perpendicular to the bending axis before bending, with distance Lzz between their centroids. And after bending the extension LZZ between the two planes can be represented as a linear function of x & y: LZZ = a' + b'x + c'y since ZZ = LZZ/LZZ , therefore: + +

= 2.3 Stress-Strain Relations According to Hooks law:

ZZ = EZZ
where E is young's modulus. Therefore = ( + + )

ZZ = a + bx + cy
Eq 1.2 where

a = Ea'/ LZZ
b = Eb'/ LZZ c = Ec'/ LZZ

Page | 3

2.4 Generalized Bending Equation By substituting 1.2 into 1.1

0 = (a + bx + cy) A = aA + bxA + cyA Mx = y(a + bx + cy)A = ayA + bxyA + cy2A My = - x(a + bx + cy)A = -axA - bx2A - cyxA
since xA = 0 & yA = 0 and y2A = Ix ,x2A = Iy & xyA = Ixy

0 = aA Mx = bIxy + cIx My = - bIy - cIxy

where Ix & Iy are the second moment of inertia with respect to the x and y axis respectively, and Ixy is the product moment of inertia. Solving the equation to obtain the constants: a = 0 (since A 0) + = = + Eq 1.3 substituting Eq 1.3 into Eq 1.2 ( + ) ( + ) +

This is the generalized bending equation that will be used to calculate the normal stress.

Page | 4

2.5 Principal Moment of Inertia

Figure 1 Principal Axes 2.5.1 Principal Axes In order to find the principal axis of inertia, let Ix & Iy are the second moment of inertia with respect to the x and y axis respectively, and Ixy is the product moment of inertia. Let (u,v) be the principal axes with the same origin and in the same plane as the (x,y) axes, and is the angle (x,y) must rotate to coincide with (u,v), is positive in the counter clockwise direction.

u = xcos + ysin v = ycos xsin

to find the second and product moment of inertia

Iu = v2A = (ycos xsin)2A Iv = u2A = (xcos + ysin)2A Iuv = uvA = (xcos + ysin)(ycos xsin)A
after integrating and knowing that: y2A = Ix ,x2A = Iy & xyA = Ixy and using trigonometric identities. The following equation cans be obtain:

Iu = 0.5[Ix + Iy] + 0.5[Ix Iy]cos2 - Ixysin2 Iv = 0.5[Ix + Iy] - 0.5[Ix Iy]cos2 + Ixysin2 Iuv = 0.5[Ix Iy]cos2 + Ixysin2
From the above equations, it can be shown that

Iu + Iv = Ix + Iy
= + Page | 5

3. EQUIPMENTS The equipments used for this experiment are listed as follows. 3.1 Frame A

Figure 3 Frame B

Page | 6

3.3 TDS 303 Data Logger

Figure 4 TDS 303 Data Logger 4. PROCEDURE The procedures of the experiment are stated as follows: a) The power of the TDS 303 Data Logger and the frame readout is turned on. b) Then the test rigs are unloaded and the strain gauge circuits are balanced in order to zero the initial reading of each channel. c) It is followed by loading the beam according to case1 of Table 1. d) When the load is stabilised the strain reading is taken. e) The steps (c) and (d) are repeated for cases 2, 3 and 4.

Case 1 2 3 4

Frame A A B B

Px 300 N 300 N 20.5 kg 20.5 kg

Py 0N 200 N 0 kg 20.5 kg

Page | 7

5. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

OR

Ix Ixy Iy 208.8 x 103 72.74 x 103 73.64 x 103 mm4 mm4 mm4 208.8 x 10-9 m4 72.74 x 10-9 m4 73.64 x 10-9 m4 Table 1 Properties of Material Case 1 2 3 4 Frame A A B B Px 300N 300N 20.5kg * 20.5kg* Py 0N 200N 0kg 20.5kg

E 70 x 109 Pa (Aluminium)

*Note: Different load direction compared with Frame A Table 2 Loading of individual cases Case 1 2 3 4 Formula Mx = Py X d My= Px X d d=0.33m Mx/Nm 0 -33 0 -33.18 My/Nm -49.5 -49.5 33.18 33.18

Table 3 Moment Calculation

Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Gauge No (horizontal (vertical (horizontal (vertical (horizontal (vertical (horizontal (vertical frame) frame) frame) frame) frame) frame) frame) frame) -190 -217 -281 -300 109 127 25 53 1 -120 -179 -195 -237 68 106 -1 55 2 -53 -141 -115 -177 25 82 -32 58 3 12 -104 -33 -115 -13 60 -61 59 4 79 -67 49 -53 -54 37 -90 60 5 149 -29 133 5 -95 14 -119 62 6 219 5 219 67 -135 -6 -147 64 7 281 43 296 130 -175 -28 -175 66 8 357 80 386 189 -217 -52 -205 67 9

Table 4 Experimental Data for Strain

Page | 8

C y3 y2

x3

x1 y1

CENTROID

Gauge No 9

Case 1 - 4 Horizontal Vertical Frame Frame x1= 36.32 x 10-3 x2=-9.29 x 10-3 m m y1 = 23.23 x 10-3 y2= -45.17 x 10-3 m m x3=-9.29 x 10-3 m y3= 23.23 x 10-3 m

Corner C
x2

Table 5 Distances X and Y for calculation of theoretical strain

Case 1 Formula = Case 2 Case 3 ( + ) ( + ) Case 4

( ) (horizontal (vertical (horizontal (vertical (horizontal (vertical (horizontal (vertical frame) frame) frame) frame) frame) frame) frame) frame) Gauge No 9 Corner C 411 -254 94 -254 454 -366 218 -366 -275 171 -63 171 -232 58 61 58

Table 6 Theoretical Strain Formula Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Experimental () Theoretical () Difference () tan = [ Ixtan + Ixy ]/[ Iy + Ixytan ] 70 71 1 63 64 1 71 71 0 97 91 6 Table 7 Experimental and Theoretical Neutral Angle,

Gauge No 9 Corner C

13.1%

14.9%

15.0%

13.3%

21.1%

17.5%

11.6%

-9.8%

25.2%

14.6%

23.2%

18.0%

36.3%

25.7%

56.9%

8.6%

Table 9 Theoretical Strain vs Experimental Strain Error Percentage

Page | 9

6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 6.1 Bok Chian Check a) Without using the generalized bending equation, describe briefly an alternative method of calculating the normal stresses at any point on an unsymmetrical beam in bending, From the principal moment of inertia, the angle of the neutral axis can be found using tan2 = -(2Ixy)/( Ix + Iy). Therefore the principal axis can be determine with respect to the x & y axis. Hence the symmetric loading equation can be used:

ZZ = Mv V + Mv U = 0 Iv
the equation can be simplified to:

Iu

V = Iutan = tan U Iv

b) For the existing experimental setup for Frame A and B, determine the expressions for Mx and My at the loading point, in terms of the applied loads. Moment = Force x Perpendicular Distance Mx = Px /2 x 0.33 (Nm) My = Py /2 x 0.33 (Nm) c) For Frame A only: When Px is loaded first, observe the load reading of Py is applied. Explain why? When Py is applied, the load reading of Px decreases. This is because when Py is applied, due to the unsymmetrical section of the beam, it cause a increase in moment about the xaxis, in the positive directions, which is the direction Px is also acting. Therefore it results in the sensor detecting a lower net force acting in the Px direction. d) Briefly explain why the NA is not 90 degrees to the applied load. Neutral axis is an axis in the cross section of a beam or shaft along that have zero longitudinal stresses or strains. It is perpendicular only to the applied load if the structure is symmetrical. However in this situation, since the beam is unsymmetrical, the neutral axis will be at an angle to the load. The angle of inclination will depend on the magnitude and direction of the applied load. e) For the case, determine the theoretical strain distribution at the strain gauged section. By means of a graph, compare the theoretical strain distribution with the experimental strain distribution. All of the experimental strain for data differ from the theoretical strain by approximately the same percentage amount, except for a few. The difference can be attributed to the
Page | 10

material and experimental error, the beam have been subjected to repeat loading and unloading for a extensive period of time, and hence suffer from metal fatigue. The experimental strain are all lower than the theoretical strain in terms of magnitude, which is expected as due to the imperfect microstructure of the material and the conservation of energy, the experimental strain must be lower or equal to calculated strain. Therefore the experimental strain data can be said to be precise but not very accurate. f) For all the case, plot the experimental strain distribution across the beam section and hence, estimate the position of the neutral axes. Compare the theoretical angles between the neutral axis and x-axis with those of the experiment. The experimental angles are found to be very close to the theoretical angles, with all having a difference by 1 with the exception of one. In case 4, the difference between the experimental and theoretical angle is found to be 6. This can be human error as the neutral axis is almost vertical with the y-axis. Which cause the graph to be out of bound of the paper, and the angle had to be estimated. Therefore the experimental angles can be said to be accurate and precise with the exception of case 4 as an anomaly. g) Explain why unsymmetrical sections are preferred in certain structural designs. In symmetrical beams, the neutral axis is fixed and is perpendicular to an applied load. Therefore if there is an second load perpendicular to the first load, then one of the load will result in stress acting on the weakest part of the cross-section. Therefore unsymmetrical sections are preferred when the bending moments are greater on one axis than the other. Another unintended benefit of unsymmetrical sections is the less material used to make it, which will reduce the weight of the structure. Conclusion The experimental data are close to the theoretical values calculated using the Generalized Bending Equation, with differences mainly due to the metal fatigue of the beam and human errors, and therefore in agreement with the generalized bending theory. The features of unsymmetrical structure were also explored and were found to be useful in situation where the bending moment are significantly different on different axis.

Page | 11

6.2 Chia Yiwen Yvonne a) Without using the generalized bending equation, describe briefly an alternative method of calculating the normal stress at any point on an unsymmetrical beam in bending. Under the earlier section of the report, it is derived that tan2 = 2

. With the

value of angle , we can determine the principal axes of bending with respect to the reference axes.

Figure A Principle axes determined from When the principle axes are defined, we can apply the general stress equation for symmetrical loading for the case of an unsymmetrical loading. The formula used is = [
( )

]+[

].

Hence therefore the alternative equation to the generalized bending equation would be: = [
( )

]+[

] , where Mu= M cos and Mv= M sin

In the case when bending stress is zero at the neutral axis (NA), the equation becomes: = [
( )

]+[

]=0

The above equation can then be further simplified to ( ) = - ( ) tan = tan .

Figure B Illustration of angle The angle is the angle of position of the neutral axis with reference to the u-axis, as illustrated in the figure above. b) For the existing experimental setup for Frame A and B, determine the expressions for Mx and My at the loading point, in terms of the applied loads.
Page | 12

The expressions of Mx and My are:

a. Mx = Py X d b. My= Px X d Where d=0.33m

The results for the individual moments for each case are:
Case 1 2 3 4 Formula Mx = Py X d My= Px X d d=0.33m Mx/Nm 0 -33 0 -33.18 My/Nm -49.5 -49.5 33.18 33.18

Table A Calculation for Mx and My c) For Frame A only: When Px is loaded first, observe the load readings of Px when Py is applied. Explain why? It had been observed that after Py is loaded, the reading for Px will be reduced. A moment is formed about the beam with the load is applied only in the positive xdirection. When Py is applied, the resultant moment increases in the x-direction and the beams natural rotates towards the positive x-direction. This results in a reduction of magnitude of load Px as the beam now bends toward the same direction where Px is acting. On the side note, the resultant bending of the beam is minuscule and we are not able to observe any significant movement of the beam through naked eye. Another possible reason is the strain gauges which are attached to the beam measures the instantaneous strain that the beam experienced. Hence with results to the effect explain above, the strain gauges read the in strain experienced by the beam. d) Briefly explain why the NA is not at 90 degrees to the applied load. A neutral axis (NA) is defined as the axial that no tension or compression is experienced. In symmetrical bending, the neutral axis will lie on the axis of symmetry. For our experiment, the beam is not a symmetrical shape and hence the neutral axis will shift depending on the load applied to obtain an imaginary axis where the forces are zero. In our experiment, the applied load is tension forces in both X and Y direction, which are perpendicular. Hence the neutral axis cannot be perpendicular to Px or Py or the X or Y direction. Depending on the magnitude of load applied, the NA will vary it inclination. Therefore, the NA will not be perpendicular to the load applied.

Page | 13

e) For the cases, determine the theoretical strain distribution at the strain gauged section. By means of a graph, compare the theoretical strain distribution with the experimental strain distribution.
Formula

( + ) ( + ) ( )

Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4

Experimental Theoretical Gauge No (horizontal) (vertical) (horizontal) (vertical) 1/C -190 -217 -254 -254 9 357 80 411 94 1/C -281 -300 -366 -366 9 386 189 454 218 1/C 109 127 171 171 9 -217 -52 -275 -63 1/C 25 53 58 58 9 -205 67 -232 61 Table B Experimental Vs Theoretical Strain Data

Thoeretical vs Experiemental
1500 1000 500 Theoretical Horizontal Gauge 9 Experimental Hortizontal Gauge 9 1 -500 -1000 2 3 4 Theoretical Vertical Gauge 9 Experimental Vertical Gauge 9 Cases

Graph A Experimental Vs Theoretical Strain

By comparison through the graph plotted, there are slight discrepancies between the experimental and theoretical strain among the four cases, which is probably the results of experimental errors. As observed there is a common trend in all cases. As strain value increases the error increases. This may be due to the experimental set-up where the load is applied indirectly onto the beam, through a load cell for Frame A and dead weights for Frame B. Hence, there might be a slight misalignment in load passing exactly through the shear centre, resulting in negligible torsion of the beam. The torsion experience is highest at Corner C and Gauge No. 9, however the formula used to calculate theoretical strain does not take torsional stress into consideration and hence results in higher error between theoretical and experimental strain values.
Page | 14

f) For all cases, plot the experimental strain distributions across the beam section and hence, estimate the positions of the neutral axes. Compare the theoretical angles between the neutral axis and x-axis with those of the experiment. Kindly refer to the group experimental strain distributions across the beam section graphs as attached.
Experimental () Theoretical () Difference () Formula tan = * Ixtan + Ixy +/* Iy + Ixytan + Case 1 70 71 1 Case 2 63 64 1 Case 3 71 71 0 Case 4 97 91 6 Table B Experimental and Theoretical Neutral Angle,

The theoretical angle were calculated through the formula, Sample Calculation, for Case 1, = = = = = + +

= As seen in Table B, the experimental angles between the neutral axis and x-axies with those of experiments have minimum errors. Hence the results prove that the generalized bending equations are accurate enough for engineering calculation and prediction of neutral axis in unsymmetrical bending. Case 4 difference is of a greater value maybe due to the experimental strain plots is too huge to fit into an A4 graph paper and the team estimated the neutral axis through projection. g) Explain why unsymmetrical sections are preferred in certain structural design. By using unsymmetrical sections, the structural weight can be minimized, and in any structural design, lighter weight is always preferred. A symmetrical beam has a fixed neutral axis and is perpendicular to the applied load. This means if there is a second loading perpendicularly to the first loading, will results in stresses in two directions, with one of it is acting at the cross-section of the weakest tolerance. On the other hand the neutral axis of an unsymmetrical beam is dependent on the loads applied which results in no particular cross-section that are significantly vulnerable to applied stresses. Therefore, while using unsymmetrical section the main concern will be designing it such that applied stresses act along the shear centre to prevent torsion.

Page | 15

CONCLUSION The experiment had demonstrated the behaviours of loadings and bending moments with respect to an unsymmetrical beam section. Where the neutral axis location is dependent upon the loading the beam experiences which is the major advantage of unsymmetrical beams in structural construction. 6.3 Christophorus Felix Kusnadi a. Without using the generalized bending equation, describe briefly an alternative method of calculating the normal stresses at any point on an unsymmetric beam in bending. First, we find the angle value of the principal axes by using the formula:
= +

Principle axes determined from value On the principal axes, we are allowed to apply the generalized bending equation for symmetrical bending on unsymmetrical bending case. The formula is:
= +

Where Mu= M cos and Mv= M sin We can simplify the above equation and come up with the final equation: = =

Illustration of angle
Page | 16

is the angle between neutral axis and u-axis. b. For the existing experimental setup for frame A and B, determine the expressions for Mx and My at the loading point, in terms of applied loads. Mx = 0.5 Px d My = 0.5 Py d Where Px and Py are forces in x and y direction while d value is 0.33 metres.

c. For Frame A only: When Px is loaded first, observe the load reading of Py is applied. Explain why? When Py is applied, the load reading of Px decreases. This is caused by the unsymmetrical section of the beam, which causes moment about the x-axis when Py is applied. This moment is on the same direction as Px which causes the gauge to measure less net force acting in the x direction. d. Briefly explain why the Neutral Axis is not at 90 degrees to the applied load. Neutral axis is an axis on a beam which has no longitudinal stresses or strains. On symmetrical structures, neutral axis is perpendicular to the applied load. However, our case deals with unsymmetrical beam, hence the neutral axis will not be perpendicular to the applied load. It will form an certain angle depending on the magnitude and direction of loads applied. e. For the case, determine the theoretical strain distribution at the strain gauged section. By means of a graph, compare the theoretical strain distribution with the experimental strain distribution. From the results obtained, we can observe that some differences between the experimental and theoretical results do exist. We can also see that the error percentage of each and every case is nearly the same. (Graph attached in Appendix). This error may be caused by some experimental errors such as machine errors, material errors (since the beam had been used for years of loading and unloading process), the strain gauges, and also the weight. The errors for each case is mainly around 20%. f. For all the case, plot the experimental strain distribution across the beam section and hence, estimate the position of the neutral axes. Compare the theoretical angles between the neutral axis and x-axis with those of the experiment. We can refer to table 6 in the Results section of this report, from the table we can see that the theoretical and experimental values of angles between the neutral axis and x-axis are quite close. For case 1 and 2, there are 1 degree difference. For case 3, the experimental and theoretical results are exactly the same. Meanwhile for case 4, there is a 6 degree difference between the theoretical and experimental values. (Graph attached in Appendix).
Page | 17

g. Explain why unsymmetrical sections are preferred in certain structural designs. Unsymmetrical sections are preferred in certain designs mainly because of its neutral axis nature. In symmetrical beams, the neutral axis is perpendicular to the applied load. Hence if there is a second load which is perpendicular to the first one, the stress caused by the second load will act upon the weakest part of the beam. This is dangerous since it can cause the beam to break. In unsymmetrical beam, the neutral axis is not fixed, it depends on the load combination, which makes it more preferred in structures undergone multiple load. Another advantage of using unsymmetrical beams is the material usage. In some cases, making unsymmetrical beam requires less materials than the symmetrical one. Conclusion The experiment verified the generalized bending theory as the theoretical results are quite close to the experimental ones. From the experiment, we can also observe the behaviour of unsymmetrical beams undergone various loads. We also observe that for an unsymmetrical beam, its neutral axis position depends on the loading experienced. Using unsymmetrical beams can be advantageous in building a structure undergoing various loads. 6.4 Goh Zhi Wei a) Alternative method of calculating the normal stresses Besides using the generalized bending equation, another method of calculation for the normal stresses at any point on an unsymmetric beam in bending is by moving the crosssection of the beam to the principle centroidal axis of the beam when doing the calculation. Using this method, the IXY will be equal to zero as the principal centroidal axis of the cross-section will become the X and Y axes. Hence, the neutral axis of the cross-section will be the same as the axis of the couple M representing the forces acting on the section, provided that the couple vector M is directed along one of the principal centroidal axes of the cross-section. Therefore, the whole calculation for the normal stresses at any point on an unsymmetric beam in bending can be simplified to using the same method that is used when calculating for the normal stresses on a symmetric beam in bending. In this simplified calculation, the principal axes of the cross-section can be determined by using Mohrs circle or analytically.
b) For the existing experimental setup for Frame A and B, determine the expressions for Mx and My at the loading point, in terms of applied load.

For both Frame A and B, the expressions for Mx and My are: Mx = Py/2 x 330mm My = Px/2 x 330mm

Page | 18

c) In Frame A, load readings of PX changes when PY is applied. When PX is loaded first, the load readings of PX will decrease when PY is subsequently applied to the frame. This is because when PY is applied, there will be a bending moment created by PY, this causes the frame to bend in a way that will move it away from the pressure point of load PX. Therefore, the pressure cause by load PX on the measuring gauge is reduced, resulting in a lesser than actual load reading of PX. d) Neutral Axis (NA) is not at 90 degrees to the applied load A Neutral Axis (NA) is defined as the axial does not undergoes any tension or compression. The neutral axis will only be at 90 degrees to the applied load only if the load is being applied to a symmetrical frame, as the neutral axis will lie on one of the axis of symmetry of the frame. However, in this experiment, the load is applied on an unsymmetric beam. Hence, the neutral axis will change depending on the load applied in order to obtain the imaginary axial axis where the forces are zero. When the applied load is added onto the unsymmetric frame, the forces on the load will result in tension forces in both the X and Y directions. This will result in the neutral axial not being at 90 degrees to either applied loads PX or PY, but at an inclination to the loads.
e) For the cases, determine the theoretical strain distribution at the strain gauged section. By means of a graph, compare the theoretical strain distributions with the experimental strain distributions. The theoretical strain distribution at the strain gauged section is shown in the table below. Form ula Gaug e No Cas e1 Cas e2 Cas e3 Cas e4 1/C 9 1/C 9 1/C 9 1/C 9

( + ) ( + ) ( )
Theoretical (horizon (verti tal) cal) -254 -254 411 94 -366 -366 454 218 171 171 -275 -63 58 58 -232 61

Experimental (horizont (vertica al) l) -190 -217 357 80 -281 -300 386 189 109 127 -217 -52 25 53 -205 67

From the 4 graphs for the 4 cases (attached to appendix), it can be seen that there are slight differences between the theoretical and experimental strain values showed in all the cases. This might be due to the experimental errors that happen during the experiment, like the wear and tear of the equipments used and the initialisation of the data logger is not done properly. From all the 4 cases, it can be noted that there are similar pattern in that the differences are larger when the strain values increase. This is because the load is applied at the bracket that is attached to the beam. This causes slight misalignment in that the load does not pass exactly through the shear centre, resulting in, close to negligible, torsion of the beam.
Page | 19

Since the torsional stress is the greatest at the two ends of the cross sectional area of the beam and that the method to calculate the theoretical strain does not take torsional stress into account, the differences in the strain values will be the largest at the two ends of the frame. f) For all cases, plot the experimental strain distributions across the beam section and hence, estimate the positions of the neutral axes. Compare the theoretical angles between the neutral axis and x-axis with those of the experiment. Determination of experimental neutral axes: For all the 4 cases, the graphs of experimental strain distributions across the beam section are plotted. Then, the neutral axes are being drawn by drawing a straight line through 2 points, 1st point is where the horizontal experimental strain line cuts the x-axis and the 2nd point is where the vertical experimental strain line cuts the y-axis. All the graphs are attached in the appendix. Comparison of the theoretical neutral angles with the experimental neutral angles: The experimental neutral angles are found by measuring the angles that the experimental neutral axes make with the x-axis. The theoretical neutral angles are found by using the following method shown below: By using the Generalized Bending Equation: = ( + ) ( = = + + + ) =

Hence, we are able to find the value of , which is the theoretical neutral angle, from the equation above. The drawing of the neutral angles and the calculations of the neutral angles can be found in the appendix. The values of both the theoretical and experimental neutral angles are shown in the table below: Case 1 2 3 4 Theoretical () 71 65 71 91 Experimental ()
70 63 71 97

Difference () 1 2 0 6

From the table above, it can be seen that there are only a slight differences between all the
Page | 20

theoretical neutral angles and the experimental neutral angles. Therefore, it can be concluded that the generalized bending equations are accurate enough to do the engineering calculations and predictions of neutral axes in unsymmetrical bending. However, in case 4, there is a larger difference of 6 between the angles. This may be due to the vertical experimental strain in case 4 being too vertical, close to 90and so its intercept with the y-axis are too high up to be able to fit and draw in a normal A4 size graph paper. Hence, the experimental neutral axis for case 4 is drawn by an estimated projection of the line resulting in a not so accurate drawing of the neutral axis. g) Explain why unsymmetrical sections are preferred in certain structural design. By using unsymmetrical sections, the structural weight can be minimized and this is useful for structural designs that require the structural weight to be as light as possible. Furthermore, a symmetrical beam is at 90o to the applied load and has a fixed neutral axis. This will result in a risk that if a second load is applied perpendicularly to the first loading, it will result in stresses occurring in two directions with one of it acting on the crosssection that has the weakest tolerance. However, an unsymmetrical beam will not have this problem. As the neutral axis for unsymmetrical beam is dependent on the loads that are applied to it, there will not be a particular cross-section that is significantly vulnerable to the applied stresses. Conclusion In this experiment, the behaviours of bending moments and loadings undergo by an unsymmetrical beam section is being demonstrated. It can also be concluded that as the position of the neutral axis is dependent on the loadings that are applied on the beam, the use of unsymmetrical beams can be preferred in certain structural designs. 6.5 Jayakrishnan Radhakrishnan a) Without using the generalized bending equation, describe briefly an alternative method of calculating the normal stresses at any point on an unsymmetric beam in bending. Previously, it is derived that tan2 = 2

. By knowing the value of the angle , the

principal axis is determined with respect to the reference axis as shown in the figure below.

Page | 21

While considering an unsymmetric loading, when the principal axis is defined, the general ( ) ( ) stress equation for a symmetrical loading = [ ]+[ ] is applied. Therefore, alternative equation to find the normal stress is given by: = [
( )

]+[

At the neutral axis, the bending stress will be zero. = [

( )

]+[

]=0

which gives, ( ) = - (

) tan = tan .

is the angle of position of the neutral axis with reference from the U-axis.

b) For the existing experimental setup for frame A and B, determine the expressions for Mx and My at the loading point, in terms of applied loads. Mx = (Py/2) x 330mm My = (Px/2) x 330mm

c) For Frame A only: When Px is loaded first, observe the load readings of Px when Py is applied. Explain why? When Py is applied, the reading of Px is reduced. It results from the moment created when Py is applied. Therefore the resultant moment is increased in the direction where Px is applied causing the beam to bend in that direction. This leads to the decrease in the reading of Px.

d) Briefly explain why the NA is not at 90 degrees to the applied load. A neutral axis is at 90 degrees to an applied load only when the frame is symmetrical where the neutral axis is located at the axis of symmetry. The frame is unsymmetrical for this experiment. As a result its location cannot be at the axis of symmetry. When the loads are applied on the frame, it causes tension in the direction where Px and Py is applied. As a result the neutral axis will not be at 90 degrees for both the loads.

Page | 22

e) For the cases, determine the theoretical strain distribution at the strain gauged section. By means of a graph, compare the theoretical strain distribution with the experimental strain distribution.

A 1 300 0

B 3 -20.50 0

4 20.50 20.5

-49.5 0

33.18 0

33.18 33.18

Formula I mm4 Location Case Gauge No 9 Strain Corner C Strain

Theoretical Strain ( ) = * (MxIy + MyIxy)y - (MyIx + MxIxy)y ]/( IxIy - Ixy2 ) Iy = 73.64 Ixy = 3 Ix = 208.8 x10 x103 72.74x103 (horizontal frame) 1 2 3 x = 36.21mm 411 x = -9.29mm -254 454 y = 23.23mm

-275 232

-366

171

94 218 -63 61 y = 23.23mm 58 254 366 171 58

From the graph (attached to appendix), it is seen that the theoretical and experimental strain values showed a slight variation for all the cases. It is probably due to the experimental errors. While observing the data it is found that as strain value increases, the error also increases. It is due to the indirect application of the loads to the beam causing misalignment of the load passing through the shear centre. As a result the torsion is negligible at the beam. But the torsional stress is greater at the two ends of the beam. As
Page | 23

the torsional stress is not considered for the calculation of theoretical strain, it leads to an increase in the error between the theoretical strain and the experimental strain values.

f) For all cases, plot the experimental strain distributions across the beam section and hence, estimate the positions of the neutral axes. Compare the theoretical angles between the neutral axis and x-axis with those of the experiment.

Therefore, the theoretical angle, =( + ) ( + ) =tan

The theoretical and experimental angles between the neutral axis and x-axis are stated below: Case 1 2 3 4 Theoretical angle, 71 65 71 91 Experimental angle, 70 63 71 97

For Case 1 and 3, it is observed that there is not much deflection in Theoretical and Experimental angles. For Case 2 and 4, a variation of 2 and 6 are found respectively. But for Case 4, the neutral axis and the vertical frame strain values are projected in order to get theoretical and experimental values.

g) Explain why unsymmetrical sections are preferred in certain structural designs Unsymmetrical sections can reduce the weight. It is preferred in considering the design of a structure. Conclusion From this experiment it is found out the influence of loadings as well as the bending moments for an unsymmetrical section of beam. It is also seen that the neutral axis depends on the loading of the unsymmetrical beam. It is an advantage in structural construction by using unsymmetrical beams.
Page | 24

REFERENCES
Boresi, P Arthur and Richard J. Schmidt. Advanced Mechanics of Materials, Oxford University Press, 2003. Ambrose, J., Patrick T.. Simplified Design of Concrete Structures, Wiley, 2007.

Page | 25

O A 2

A1

O1

O1

Diagram Calculation of Centroid

= = = (

= = + )+(

= )( )

= =

= =

)+(

)(

Calculation of Ix = = = = = =( = + ( ) + + ( )

+ (

+ (

+ )( )( )+( )( )( )

Page | 26

Calculation of Case 1,

and

= = = =
Case 2,

= = + +

= = = =
Case 3,

= + +

= = = =
Case 4,

= = + +

= = = =

= = + +

Page | 27

Sample Calculation for Theoretical Strain For example CASE 2 HORIZONTAL GAUGE NO 9

( + ) ( + ) ( )

Sub the following to the equation above:

= = = = = = = = = = =

= = =

VERTICAL GAUGE NO 9

( + ) ( + ) ( )

= = = = = = = =

= = =

= =

Page | 28

CORNER C

( + ) ( + ) ( )

Sub the following to the equation above:

= = = = = = = =

= = =

= =

Page | 29

Appendix B Graphs

Page | 30