п»їAM 317

TECHNICIANS LAB

RESEARCH 1

BEAM DEFLECTIONS

TEST OUT PERFORMED: FEB . 4, 2015

REPORT PUBLISHED: FEBRUARY 10, 2015

SIMPLY BY

HAGOP MERTEKHANIAN

College student I. M # 105200288

Wednesday several: 00 pm hours

GROUP 1

SUMMARY

Deflections of a beam are crucial to be capable predict the quantity of deflection for any given reloading situation. This experiment details determining the yield level for a material to fail, hence the stress in the material will not have to reach to that stage. This is where understanding beam deviation becomes a useful tool. This experiment is applying beam deflection theory to evaluate and review observed deflection per fill values to theoretical values. Beam deviation experiment made by four parts. Part one particular -Simple Recognized Bean, portion 2-Cantilever Beam, part 3-The Principle of Superposition, and Part 4-Maxwell's Reciprocity Theorem. For component 1 and 2 beam dimensions were recorded and therefore are moment of inertia (I) was worked out using the next formula I=bh3/12. for part1, maximum allowable loads intended for mid-span and quarter-span had been calculated. Pertaining to part 2 maximum permissible loads pertaining to mid-span and end of the cantilever light beam were computed. For the two parts distinct loads were applied and deflections had been recorded. After calculating typical modulus of elasticity pertaining to simple backed beam, that was approximately (-27. 6*10^6 psi), it was compared to modulus of elasticity graph. The result signifies that the beam simple recognized beam was made of Wrought iron. Intended for cantilever beam, average modulus of firmness were worked out, which was about (9148056. 3), and compared with young's modulus chart. the effect indicate that cantilever light was made of Aluminum. Part 3 reference point was chosen, single centered load in other stage was utilized and deflection was recorded at reference point. Same procedure was applied at another point around the beam and deflection was recorded at reference. Finally, both loads were applied and deflection was recorded at the reference. The error between experimental deflection and theoretical deflection was a few. 85% (as it proven in Table-6). For part 4 two non-symmetrical reference points had been chosen, focused load (P1) at first stage was utilized, and deflection (Оґ21) was written. At second non-symmetrical stage, concentrated load (P2) was applied; deflection (Оґ12) was written. The effects this section of the experiment would satisfy the next equation P112 =P221(equation 6) with and error regarding 9. 81%. Introduction

Engineers use beams to support a lot over a span length. These beams happen to be structural Users that are simply loaded non-axially causing them to be subjected to twisting. The displacements of the initial axis are called bending or perhaps flexural deflection. " An item is said to be in bending if the forces act on a piece of material in such a way that they tend to cause compressive tensions over one part of a cross area of the part and tensile stresses over the remaining partвЂќ (Ref. 4). The amount of the deflection in a beam relates to the following. I-moment of inertia

P-single used concentrated fill

L-length of the beam

E- the modulus of flexibility

Position with the applied weight on the light

The amount of deviation due to an individual concentrated load P has by:

K- constant based on the position of the fill, and on the finish conditions from the beam

The bending pressure at any location of the beam section is determined by the flexure solution:

M-

Y-

I-

The greatest stress exact same section stick to from this regards by taking sumado a at an extreme fiver at distance c which leads to

Theory

The amount of the deviation due to an individual concentrated fill P Оґ (Equation 1)

I-moment of inertia (IN4)

P-single utilized concentrated load (LB)

L-length of the light beam. (IN)

E- The modulus of flexibility. (Psi)

Position of the applied load for the beam.

K- Constant based upon the position from the load, and...

References: 1-Ehrgott, Richard, Mechanised Laboratory Are 317, CSUN, 2015

2-Rho, JY (1993). " Small 's modulus of trabecular and cortical bone materials: ultrasonic and microtensile measurements". Journal of Biomechanics dua puluh enam (2): 111вЂ“119. doi: 12. 1016/0021-9290(93)90042-d.

3-. Mertekhanian, Hagop. CE 3410 Notes вЂ“ " Twisting summaryвЂќ, received in class.

farreneheit. 1)