Discussion 1. What results were expected? What results were obtained?

If there were any discrepancies, how can you account for them? From the figure () shown in, the graph plotted between theoretical and experimental was found to be linear form. The two linear lines were compared and a slight difference of error in average percentage of 13.5% was found. From the collected () shown in, a slight difference of error in average percentage of 3.9% was found. It is acceptable since the values are very close to each other. Hence, the equation of theoretical shear force is valid and complies with the results obtained. From the overall results for part (), the bending moment is increased as mass varies from 100 grams to 500 grams. As shown in TABLE 3.0, the theoretical bending moment and the experimental bending moment increased disorderly for each 100 grams of load is added. This leads into different circumstances. One of the essential factors would be the inaccurate precision of the digital force display as only one decimal point is displayed. Moreover, experimental bending moment is only recorded once and no repetition was done. The values obtained are slightly deviated from theoretical values since average of results is not taken into consideration. Furthermore, the presence of wind is also considered one of the factors. Air-conditioner turned on during the experiments caused air movement in the laboratory which further provoke a minor oscillation on the load. 2. Do any of your results have particular technical or theoretical interest? The technical interest is the difficulties to maintain the load at rest due to air movement. This can be solved by turning off air-conditioner as well as wait until the load to stay resting. 3. How do your results relate to your experimental objective(s)? From the figure (), the load is increasing linearly with the force. The results showed that the bending moment at a cut section is equal to the algebraic sum of the moments acting to the left or right of the section. Moreover, three errors are pointed out to be taken into considerations. Hence, the results obtained fulfil the objective of the experiment. 4. How do your results compare to those obtained in similar investigations?

Comparison is made between several laboratory groups and the results obtained are almost similar. Graphs pattern of increasing linearly has been achieved among most of the laboratory groups. 5. What are the strengths and limitations of your experimental design? One of the limitations in this experimental design is the fluctuation of readings approximately 0.1N due to the minor movement of air in the laboratory which could not be avoided. Furthermore, low sensitivity of the digital force display affects the results obtained since 0.1 is more imprecise than 0.01. Conversely, the significant strength in this experimental design is the efficiency of the digital force display. Value of force is shown as soon as the load is applied. Besides that, the existence of a centre slot which enables a hanger to be hung on it. This will restrict the mobility of the hanger and thus accurate results are obtained. 6. If you encountered difficulties in the experiment, what were their sources? How might they be avoided in future experiments? In this experiment, it is very difficult to reset the reading of the digital display to zero. This can be solved by having a more advance device so that recalibrating the reading back to zero will not be a problem. Another difficulty encountered was that there is too much vibration or oscillation on the load. This is due to the carelessness when placing the load onto the hanger. This can be solved by being more careful when placing the load. Besides, there is draught in the laboratory, causing the air movement in the laboratory to be one of the causes for the unstable load. The air movement in the laboratory can be lessened by turning off the air-conditioning system or fan. In addition, the sensitivity of digital display is too low thus causing the slight difference between the experimental value and theoretical value. This can be overcome by having a more sensitive device. Lastly, experiment is only done for once, therefore the reading obtained may not be accurate. This can be avoided by repeating the experiment for three times, and calculate the average of the three readings obtained.