Summary / Abstract :

In this experiment, our purpose is to measure deflections () of a beam which is subjected

to concentrated loads and various support arrangements, verification of bending
equations, and determination of flexural rigidity and elastic modulus for various
materials.
This experiment consists of 2 tasks. The purpose of task 1 is to investigate the
relationship between the applied load and the deflection of the beam, the relationship
between the deflection and the span of the beam, the relationship between the deflection
and the height of the beam and the relationship between deflection of the beam and the
width of beam used. In task 2, the coefficient of elasticity for steel, aluminum, brass and
wood were determined by using the same apparatus.
Based on the result, it is concluded that the deflection increases proportionally
with the applied load in a simply supported beam. The deflection at mid-span also
increases proportionally with the span of the beam. In graphs 3 and 4, it is also concluded
that deflection is inversely proportional with width and height of the beam. From the
results of task 2 (table 5), the flexural stress and coefficient of elasticity, E for different
material can be determined.

Statement of Purpose / Introduction / Objective :

Task 1

To investigate the relationships between the applied load and the deflection of a
beam.
To investigate the relationships between the span and the deflection of a beam.
To investigate the relationships between the height and the deflection of a beam.
To investigate the relationships between the width of the cross-sectional area and
the deflection of a beam.

Task 2

To ascertain the coefficient of elasticity, E for steel, aluminum, brass and wood.

Page

Theory :
The apparatus has been design to carry out experiments simply supported and cantilever
beams in order to investigate:
a) The relationship between the deflection and the applied loads.
b) The effect of variations in length and cross sectional i.e. deflection per unit load.
Simply supported beam with center point load
For this arrangement, it can be shown that the deflection under the load i.e. maximum
deflection
= WL3
48EI
Where
Beam compliance

W
b

I = bd3
12

= 4L3
W Ebd3

Cantilever beam with end point load

For this arrangement, it can be shown that the center deflection relative to the supports,
i.e. maximum deflection between the supports:
= WL3
3EI
Where
Beam compliance

b
d

I = bd3
12
= 4Ll3
W Ebd3

Page

Simply supported beam subjected to uniform bending moment

For this arrangement, it can be shown that the center deflection relative to the supports,
i.e. maximum deflection between the supports :
= WaL3
8EI
Where
Beam compliance

I = bd3
12
= 3 aL3
W 2Ebd3

d
a

dia
* For circular beam is given as

L
W
I
E
b
d
dia

I = dia4
64

= Deflection (mm)
= Span (mm)
= Load (N)
= Second moment of area
= Coefficient of Elasticity
= Width of beam
= Thickness of beam
= Diameter of circular beam

Page

Equipment :
LOADS
(STEEL CYLINDER)

5N
10N
15N
20N

TEST SPECIMENS

3 x 25 mm
4 x 15 mm
4 x 20 mm
4 x 25 mm
4 x 30 mm
6 x 25 mm
8 x 25 mm
Steel, Brass, and Aluminium rod
(with diameter. 8mm)

TESTING DEVICE

Gauge meter
(One resolution = 1 mm of deflection)

Page

Apparatus :
TWIST AND BEND TEST MACHINE MT 210

Procedure :
TASK 1
Procedure 1: Investigate the relationship between load and deflection
1. The bearer is set so that a span of 600 mm is obtained. The interval between each
groove on the shafts of the apparatus is 100 mm.
2. A test specimen is placed with dimensions of 6 x 25 mm on the bearers and the load
device is mounted in the center of the test specimen.
3. The testing device is set so that the top of the gauge is centered on the upper plane of
the load device. The gauge is lowered so that the small hand is about 10 and the
gauge is set to 0 by twisting its outer ring. Weights are loaded as shown in the table
below and the deflection is read.
4. A graph of loading vs. deflection is drawn.

Page

Procedure 2: Investigate the relationship between span and deflection

1. A test specimen is employed with dimensions of 6 x 25 mm and a weight of 10 N is
loaded. The span is varied as indicated in the table and the deflection is read.
2. A graph of span vs. deflection is drawn
Procedure 3: Investigate the relationship between width and deflection of the test
specimen
1. The bearers are set for a span of 500 mm. The test specimens are employed indicated
in the table, a weight of 5 N is loaded and the deflection is read.
2. A graph of width of the test specimen vs. deflection is drawn.
Procedure 4: Investigate the relationship between the height and deflection of
the test specimen
1. The bearers are set for a span of 500 mm. The test specimens are employed indicated
in the table, a weight of 5 N is loaded and the deflection is read.
2. A graph of height of the test specimen vs. deflection is drawn.

TASK 2
To ascertain the Coefficient of Elasticity for Steel, Brass, Aluminium and Wood.
1. The bearers are set to obtain a span of 500mm. A circular test specimen (diameter =
8mm) for the metals and a rectangular test specimen of dimensions 6 x 30 mm for the
wood are employed.
2. The loading device is mounted on the test specimen of steel and the testing device is
set to zero.
3. The loading device is then loaded with weights as indicated in Table #6 and the
deflection readings are recorded from the gauge.
4. The experiment is repeated for the Brass and Aluminium.

Page

Data / Observation :
Tables:

Span

600mm

Specimen dimension =

Load ( N)

Deflection ( mm )

5
10
15
20

0.180
0.440
0.680
1.000

6 x 25 mm

Page

Table 1: Relationship between load and deflection

Load =

10 N

Specimen dimension =

Span ( mm )

Deflection ( mm )

300
400
500
600

0.070
0.170
0.270
0.440

6 x 25 mm

Table 2: Relationship between span and deflection

Load =

5N

Span

Test Specimen
Dimension (mm )

Deflection ( mm )

4 x 15
4 x 20
4 x 25
4 x 30

0.870
0.720
0.460
0.430

500 mm

500 mm

Table 3: Relationship between width and deflection

Load =

5N

Span

Test Specimen
Dimension (mm )

Deflection ( mm )

3 x 25
4 x 25
6 x 25
8 x 25

1.380
0.460
0.190
0.050

Table 4: Relationship between height and deflection

F1

2.5 N
Page

Material

Load
(N)

Moment of
Flexure Mb
( Nmm )

Flexural
Stress b
(N/mm2)

Deflection
( mm )

Coefficient Of Elasticity

E
Steel

Brass

Aluminum

5
10
15
5
10
15
5
10
15

937.5
1562.5
2187.5
937.5
1562.5
2187.5
937.5
1562.5
2187.5

18.651
31.085
43.519
18.651
31.085
43.519
18.651
31.085
43.519

0.330
0.680
0.980
0.790
1.520
2.230
1.010
2.050
2.980

Average E
( N/ mm2)
(N/mm2)
196243.399 194986.939
190471.534
198245.883
81975.091
84769.183
85210.950
87121.509
64119.130
64164.962
63180.802
65194.955

Table 5: Coefficient of elasticity and flexural stress

Graphs:
1. Graph 1: Load vs. Deflection page 13
2. Graph 2: Span vs. Deflection page 13
3. Graph 3: Width vs. Deflection page 14
4. Graph 4: Height vs. Deflection page 14

Analysis / Results :
Sample of calculation
Moment of flexure, M b
Where
Where

( F1 F ) L
(Nmm)
4

F 1 = Load occasioned by weight of load device (N) (2.5 N)

F = Load occasioned by additional weight (N)
L = Span (500 mm)
b = width (25.00mm)
h = height (6.00mm)
d = diameter (8.0mm) for steel, brass and aluminium specimen

Page

Resistance to flexure for rectangular, W b

bh 2
6

(mm3)

= 150.00 mm 3

Inertia factor for rectangular, I

bh 3
(mm4)
12

= 450.00 mm4

Resistance to flexure for circular, Wb

d3
(mm 3)
32

= 50.265 mm3

Inertia factor for circular, I

d4
(mm4)
64

= 201.062 mm4
Flexural stress, b

Mb
(N/mm2 )
Wb

Coefficient of elasticity, E

FL3
48 I

Deflection,

FL3
(mm)
48 EI

Sample calculation for Brass with load = 15N

( F1 F ) L
(Nmm)
4
(15 2.5) 500

Moment of flexure, M b

= 2187.5 Nmm
Flexural stress, b

Mb
(N/mm2 )
Wb

2187.500
50.265

= 43.519 N/mm 2
with = 2.230 mm

Page

10

The coefficient of elasticity, E

FL3
48 I

15(500) 3
48( 201.062)2.230

= 87121.466 N/mm2

Theoretical value for Modulus of Elasticity:

E (steel) = 200 GPa
= 200000 N/mm2
E (brass)
= 105 GPa
= 105000 N/mm2
E (aluminum)
= 70 GPa
= 70000 N/mm2
Percentage Error
% error for Steel

200000.000 194986.939

100%

200000.000

= 2.507 %

% error for Brass

105000.000 84769.183

100%

105000.000

= 19.267%

% error for Aluminium

70000.000 64164.962

100%

70000.000

= 8.336 %

Page

11

Material

**Theoretical
Modulus of
Elasticity, Eth
(N/mm2)
200000.000

Percentage
Error %

Steel

Experimental
Modulus of
Elasticity, Eave
(N/mm2)
194986.939

Brass

84769.183

105000

19.267 %

Aluminum

61464.962

70000

8.336 %

2.507 %

Table 6: Error of each material

Graph 1: Applied Load vs. Deflection

Graph 2: Span vs. Deflection

Graph 3: Width of the Test Specimen vs. Deflection

Graph 4: Height of the Test Specimen vs. Deflection

Page

12

Discussion :
After the experiment was completed, it can be said that the main objectives were
achieved. In the task 1 of this experiment, the relationship between the applied load, span,
widths, height with the deflection of a beam were investigated. Each beam was placed on
two bearers affected by a concentrated load at the center. In Task 2, the value of Modulus
of Elasticity for Steel, Brass and Aluminum were also determined.
For the task to investigate the relationship between applied load and deflection, a
linear curve was obtained in graph 1 shows that the deflection is directly proportionally
to the applied load in a simply supported beam. It matches with the theory as = FL3 /
48EI.
For the task to investigate the relationship between span and deflection, an
approximate linear curve was obtained in graph 2. This indicates that the deflection
increases with the span. Again the result is valid as = FL3 / 48EI.
In the graph 3 and graph 4, which show the relationship between the width and
height with the deflection of the beam under constant loading and span, both give a
curve. It can be concluded that deflection is inversely proportional with width and height
of the beam.
For the second task of the experiment, which the task is to determine the respective
values of Modulus of Elasticity for Steel, Brass and Aluminum, the results are recorded in
Table 6. Overall, the data obtained were of high accuracy because the percentage error is
below 20%.
Although the value obtained in this experiment is considered quite accurate, there are
still few errors that should be highlighted as they do affect the results slightly. The errors
are as follow:

The dial gauge did not give a constant value whenever the beam is being jerked
even though no extra load is applied. Besides that, Parallax error might exist. This
is a human error while taking the reading from the scale of the apparatus.

Secondly the test specimen used may have been subjected to high loading cycle as
they are repeatedly used. This will affect properties of the material such as
Modulus of Elasticity.

Finally, the load might not be aligned properly at the center of the beam, and thus
produce a different value of deflection.

Page

13

Conclusion :
As a conclusion, it was found that deflection is directly proportional to the applied load, F
and span, L and inversely proportional to the width, b and height (thickness, d) of the
beam after the relationship between the applied loads, span, widths, and height with the
deflection of a beam were investigated.
The results obtained are found to match the formula of = FL3 / 48EI. Besides
that, the Modulus of Elasticity for Steel, Brass and Aluminum were successfully
determined and their values are as follow:
E (steel)
E (brass)
E (aluminum)

=194986.939 N/mm2
= 84769.183 N/mm2
= 61464.962 N/mm2

Overall, the percentage errors are below 20%. In short, the bending test can be used to
determine the E for an unknown material.

References:
1. Shigley and Mischke, Mechanical Engineering Design, Fifth Edition, McGraw Hill
Inc., New York, 1989, page 729.
2. Ferdinand P. Beer, E. Russell Johnston. JR., Mechanical of Materials, Second Edition,
McGraw Hill Inc, New York, 1989, pages 700, 701.

Page

14