AEROSPACE LABORATORY II

EAS 3922
Materials
Semester 1 (2013 / 2014)
EXPERIMENT 1
REACTION OF BEAM TEST
Date of Experiment: 20th September 2013
Name:
Muhammad Azhar Bin Mat Marzuki (164369)
Group Members:
Sivasanghari Karunakaran (165330)
Sarah Munirah Binti Sirajul Huda (162188)
Muhammad Azhar Bin Mat Marzuki (164369)

Lecturers Name

: DR. MOHAMAD RIDZWAN ISHAK

Demonstrators Name

: MS. NOOR HAZIRA BINTI MOHAMED HAIDZIR

Technicians Name

: MR. MAZRUL HISHAM & MR. MOHD WILDAN

Objective:
The objectives of this experiment are
1. To identify the supports reaction in simply-supported and overhanging beams.
2. To develop an understanding of beam apparatus, and to determine its sensitivity and
accuracy.

Introduction:
Newtons third law of motion stated that For every action force there is an equal and
opposite reaction force. Anytime an object applies a force to another object, there is an equal
and opposite force back on the original object. This can be seen by pushing a wall by your
hand, if you push on a wall you feel a force against your hand, the wall is pushing back on
you with as much force as you apply to it. Structures also have this kind of characteristic,
therefore it is essential for engineers to study the reaction forces on the structures and the
effect of external forces on the structures. In this experiment we had conduct two experiments
on three beams (steel, aluminium, and brass) to study their force reaction when being applied
with certain loaded.

Theory:
Theory Of Beams
If a beam is loaded as at W W W, Fig. 13, the weights produce reactions at the supports.
These forces, or reactions, R1, and R2, oppose the action of the weights and their combined
action must equal the total weight. The weights and reactions, constituting the external forces,
tend to produce bending in the beam, and are resisted by the internal forces, consisting of the
strength of the fibers composing the beam. In a simple beam, the effect of loading is to
shorten the upper fibers, and to lengthen the lower ones. Somewhere between the top and
bottom of the cross-section are located fibers which are neither shortened nor lengthened; this
position is called the neutral axis (see page 75). In steel and like material of homogeneous
nature, the neutral axis passes through the center of gravity of the section.

Reactions:
The reactions or supporting forces of any beam or structure must equal the loads upon it. If
the load upon a simple beam is uniformly distributed, applied at the center of the span, or
symmetrically placed and of equal amount upon each side of the center, the reactions R1 and
R2 will each be equal to one-half the load. When the loads are not symmetrically placed, the
reactions are found by the principle of moments in the following manner:
Fig. 14 represents a simple beam supporting loads W1 W2 , and W3; I is the span or distance
between the reactions R1 and R2; a, b, and c are the distances from the reaction R1 to the
loads W1, W2 W3.. ively. Then the right-hand reaction, R2 =
(W1x a)+( W2 x b)+(W3.x c) / l

This formula expressed in a general rule is: To find the reaction at either support, multiply
each load by its distance from the other support, and divide the sum of these products by the
distance between supports.

Since the sum of the reactions must equal the sum of the loads, if one reaction is found, the
other can he obtained by subtracting the known one from the sum of the loads.

Apparatus and Material:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Beam apparatus- SM104

Vernier calliper
Load cells
Dial gauges
Weight hangers
Weights: 5 N, 10 N
Steel blocks
Beams: Steel / Brass / Aluminium

Procedures

Supports Reaction of The Simply-Supported Beam with Concentrated Loads

1. The thickness and width of the beam were measured.
2. The length of the beam was measured and at mid-span and -span points were
marked.
3. Load cells -span was set up to the left and mid span reading was at right, and the
knife edge was locked.
4. The beam was placed in position with -span overhang either end.
5. Two weight hangers were positioned equidistant from the midpoint of the beam.
6. Dial gauge was placed in position on the upper cross-member so that the ball end rests
on the centre-line of the beam immediately above the left-hand support.
7. The stem was checked in vertical and bottom O-ring had been moved down the stem.
8. The dial gauge was adjusted to zero read and the bezel was locked in position.
9. The dial gauge was moved to a position above the right-hand support, the beam was
checked so that it parallels to the cross member, the height of the knife edge was
adjusted so that the dial gauge reads zero.
10. The dial gauge was removed and both knife edges were unlocked. The load cell
indicators were adjusted to zero.
11. Loads were applied to the weight hangers in a systematic manner, the beam was tap
gently and the readings of the load cells were taken.
12. The results were processed and the graphs were plotted from the experimental results.

Supports Reaction of the Overhanging Beam with Concentrated and Distributed Loads
1. The thickness and width of the beam were measured
2. The load cells -span was set up to the left while 1/8-span to the right of the mid-span
reading and the knife edge was locked.
3. A dial gauge was placed in position on the upper cross-member so that the ball end
rests on the centre-line of the beam immediately above the left-hand support.
4. The stem was checked in vertical and the bottom O-ring had been moved down to the
stem.
5. The dial gauge was adjusted to zero and the bezel was locked in position.
6. The dial gauge was moved to a position above the right-hand support, the beam was
checked so that it parallels to the cross member, the height of the knife edge was
adjusted so that the dial gauge reads zero.
7. The dial gauge was removed and both knife edges were unlocked. The load cell
indicators were adjusted to zero.
8. A weight hanger 1/8-span was position to the left from the end point of the beam.
9. The loads were applied to the weight hanger and steel block in a systematic manner,
and the readings of the load cells were taken.
10. The results were processed and the graphs were plotted from the experimental results.

Supports Reaction of the Simply-Supported Beam with Concentrated Loads

A. RESULT

Beam
Steel
Brass
Aluminum

Beam
length, L
(mm)
1351
1350
1350

Beam width, b (mm)

1

Beam thickness, h (mm)

Avg.

19.10 19.08 19.10 19.06 6.36

19.16 19.14 19.14 19.15 6.38
19.24 19.26 19.24 19.25 6.54
Table1: Measurement of the beam

Avg.

6.38
6.46
6.54

6.36
6.48
6.58

6.37
6.44
6.55

Steel beam
W1 (N) W2 (N) R1 (N) R2 (N) R1 + R2 (N) (N)
5
0
2.8
0.5
3.3
-1.7
10
0
6.9
1.4
8.3
-1.7
15
0
10.7
2.6
13.3
-1.7
20
0
14.2
3.8
18
-2
25
0
17.2
5.1
22.3
-2.7
30
0
21.8
6.0
27.8
-2.2
0
5
1.0
3.7
4.7
-0.3
0
10
1.6
7.0
8.6
-1.4
0
15
2.4
9.9
12.2
-2.8
0
20
3.8
13.8
17.6
-2.4
0
25
4.7
17.1
21.8
-3.2
0
30
5.9
21.1
27.0
-3
5
5
4.0
4.2
8.2
-1.8
10
10
8.7
8.6
17.3
-2.7
15
15
13.4
13.6
27
-3
20
20
18.8
18.7
37.5
-2.5
25
25
23.0
22.8
45.8
-4.2
30
30
29.4
28.9
58.3
-1.7
(
) (
)
*
(
)

%
-34.0
-17.0
-11.3
-10.0
-10.8
-7.3
-6.0
-14.0
-18.7
-12.0
-12.8
-10.0
-18.0
-13.5
-10.0
-6.3
-8.4
-2.8

Table2: Experimental results of simply-supported steel beam with concentrated loads

Brass beam
W1 (N) W2 (N) R1 (N) R2 (N) R1 + R2 (N) (N)
5
0
3.6
1
4.6
-0.4
10
0
7.2
2.4
9.6
-0.4
15
0
10.8
3.4
14.2
-0.8
20
0
13.8
4.6
18.4
-1.6
25
0
18.4
5.5
23.9
-1.1
30
0
21.4
6.4
27.8
-2.2

%
-8.0
-4.0
-5.3
-8.0
-4.4
-7.3

0
0
0
0
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30

5
10
15
20
25
30
5
10
15
20
25
30

0.7
1.7
2.8
4
5.2
6.8
4.8
8.6
13.6
19.6
24.8
28.3

2.2
5.8
9.5
12.1
16.6
20.5
3.6
7.9
13
19.9
24.1
29.3

2.9
7.5
12.3
16.1
21.8
27.3
8.4
16.5
26.6
39.5
48.9
57.6

-2.1
-2.5
-2.7
-3.9
-3.2
-2.7
-1.6
-3.5
-3.4
-0.5
-1.1
-2.4

-42.0
-25.0
-18.0
-19.5
-12.8
-9.0
-16.0
-17.5
-11.3
-1.3
-2.2
-4.0

Table3: Experimental results of simply-supported brass beam with concentrated loads

Aluminum Beam
W1 (N) W2 (N) R1 (N) R2 (N) R1 + R2 (N) (N)
5
0
3.1
1
4.1
-0.9
10
0
6.7
1.4
8.1
-1.9
15
0
10.6
2.3
12.9
-2.1
20
0
14.5
3.5
18.0
-2.0
25
0
18.2
4.6
22.8
-2.2
30
0
21.9
6.1
28.0
-2.0
0
5
0.9
2.8
3.7
-1.3
0
10
1.6
6.1
7.7
-2.3
0
15
2.8
9.5
12.3
-2.7
0
20
4.6
13.4
18.0
-2.0
0
25
5
17.8
22.8
-2.2
0
30
6.5
20.4
26.9
-3.1
5
5
4
3.8
7.8
-2.2
10
10
9.4
8.8
18.2
-1.8
15
15
13.9
13.4
27.3
-2.7
20
20
18.8
17.9
36.7
-3.3
25
25
23.9
21.6
45.5
-4.5
30
30
28.4
27.4
55.8
-4.2

%
-18.0
-19.0
-14.0
-10.0
-8.8
-6.7
-26.0
-23.0
-18.0
-10.0
-8.8
-10.3
-22.0
-9.0
-9.0
-8.3
-9.0
-7.0

Table4: Experimental results of simply-supported aluminum beam with concentrated loads

Graph for Supports Reaction of the Simply-Supported Beam with Concentrated Loads:

Reaction Forces [N]

Graph of Reaction Forces [N] against W1[N], when

W2=0 for Steel
25

y = 0.7394x - 0.6733
R = 0.9974

20

R1 (N)

15
y = 0.2274x - 0.7467
R = 0.9972

10

R2 (N)
Linear (R1 (N))

Linear (R2 (N))

0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

W1[N]

Graph of Reaction Forces [N] against W1[N], when

W2=0 for Brass
Reaction Force [N]

25
y = 0.7177x - 0.0267
R = 0.9976

20
15

R1 (N)
R2 (N)

y = 0.2143x + 0.1333
R = 0.9941

10
5

Linear (R1 (N))

Linear (R2 (N))

0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

W1 [N]

Graph of Reaction Forces [N] against W1[N], when

W2=0 for Aluminium
Reaction Force [N]

25
y = 0.7566x - 0.74
R = 0.9999

20
15

R1 (N)

10

R2 (N)

y = 0.2074x - 0.48
R = 0.9736

Linear (R1 (N))

Linear (R2 (N))

0
0

10

15

20

W1 [N]

25

30

35

Graph 1, 2, 3: Reaction forces [N] against W1 [N], when W2=0 for steel, brass, and
aluminium.

Graph of Reaction Forces [N] against W2[N], when

W1=0 for Steel
Reaction Force [N]

25
y = 0.6926x - 0.02
R = 0.9979

20
15

R1 (N)

10

R2 (N)

y = 0.2011x - 0.2867
R = 0.987

Linear (R1 (N))

Linear (R2 (N))

0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

W2 [N]

Graph of Reaction Forces [N] against W2[N], when

W1=0 for Brass
Reaction force [N]

25
y = 0.7229x - 1.5333
R = 0.9962

20
15

R1 (N)

10

R2 (N)

y = 0.2411x - 0.6867
R = 0.994

Linear (R1 (N))

Linear (R2 (N))

0
0

10

15

20

W2 [N]

25

30

35

Graph of Reaction Forces [N] against W2[N], when

W1=0 for Aluminium
Reaction Force [N]

25
y = 0.7257x - 1.0333
R = 0.9966

20
15

R1 (N)
R2 (N)

y = 0.2286x - 0.4333
R = 0.9813

10
5

Linear (R1 (N))

Linear (R2 (N))

0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

W2 [N]

Graph 4, 5, 6: Reaction forces [N] against W2 [N], when W1=0 for aluminium, steel and
brass

Graph of Reaction Forces [N] against W1 = W2 [N] for

Steel
Reaction Force [N]

35
y = 0.9783x - 0.9867
R = 0.9979

30
25
20

R1 (N)

15

R2 (N)

10

Linear (R2 (N))

5
0
0

10

15

20

W1=W2 [N]

25

30

35

Graph of Reaction Forces [N] against W1 = W2 [N] for

Brass
Reaction Force [N]

35
30

y = 0.9834x - 0.5933
R = 0.9947

25

y = 1.0514x - 2.1
R = 0.9961

20

R1 (N)

15

R2 (N)

10

Linear (R1 (N))

Linear (R2 (N))

0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

W1=W2 [N]

Graph of Reaction Forces [N] against W1 = W2 [N] for

Aluminium
Reaction Force [N]

30

y = 0.9737x - 0.64
R = 0.9995

25
20

R1 (N)

y = 0.9194x - 0.6067
R = 0.9975

15
10

R2 (N)
Linear (R1 (N))

Linear (R2 (N))

0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

W1=W2 [N]

Graph 7, 8, 9: Reaction forces [N] against W1=W2 [N] for Steel, Brass, and Aluminium.

Supports Reaction of the Overhanging Beam with Concentrated and Distributed Loads
B. RESULT
Aluminium
wl[N]
W[N]
R1 [N]
R2 [N]
R1+R2 [N]
[N]
%
0
5
3.9
1.6
5.5
-0.5
-10.0
0
10
5.8
3.3
9.1
-0.9
-9.0
0
15
9.7
4.9
14.6
-0.4
-2.7
0
20
12.2
6.6
18.8
-1.2
-6.0
20
5
10.7
14.6
25.3
0.3
1.2
20
10
7.8
22.6
30.4
0.4
1.3
20
15
4.6
30.6
35.2
0.2
0.6
20
20
1.3
38.6
39.9
-0.1
-0.3
5
5
1.2
9.6
10.8
0.8
8.0
10
10
0.5
19.3
19.8
-0.2
-1.0
15
15
0.8
28.8
29.6
-0.4
-1.3
20
20
1.4
38.4
39.8
-0.2
-0.5
Table 4: Experimental results of Overhanging beam with concentrated and distributed loads
Steel
wl[N]
W[N]
R1 [N]
R2 [N]
R1+R2 [N]
[N]
%
0
5
2.6
1.7
4.3
-0.7
-14.0
0
10
6.3
3.3
9.6
-0.4
-4.0
0
15
9.1
5.0
14.1
-0.9
-6.0
0
20
13.5
6.0
20.1
0.1
2.0
20
5
9.6
14.7
24.3
-0.7
-2.8
20
10
7.3
22.7
30.0
0.0
0.0
20
15
3.8
30.8
34.6
-0.4
-1.1
20
20
0.3
38.8
39.1
-0.9
-2.3
5
5
0.3
9.7
10.0
0.0
0.0
10
10
0.6
19.5
20.1
0.1
0.5
15
15
0.4
29.2
29.6
-0.4
-1.3
20
20
0.6
38.9
39.5
-0.5
-1.3
Table 5: Experimental results of Overhanging beam with concentrated and distributed loads

Brass
wl[N]
W[N]
R1 [N]
R2 [N]
R1+R2 [N]
[N]
%
0
5
3.0
2.2
5.2
0.2
10.0
0
10
5.5
4.4
9.9
-0.1
-1.0
0
15
8.2
6.6
14.8
-0.2
-1.3
0
20
10.8
8.8
19.6
-0.4
-2.0
20
5
7.4
16.9
24.3
-0.7
-2.8
20
10
5.2
25.0
30.2
0.5
1.7
20
15
2.1
33.1
35.2
0.2
0.6
20
20
1.0
41.3
42.3
2.3
5.8
5
5
0.5
10.5
11.0
1.0
10.0
10
10
0.4
21.0
21.4
1.4
7.0
15
15
1.4
31.5
32.9
2.9
9.7
20
20
2.0
42.1
44.1
4.1
10.3
Table 6: Experimental results of Overhanging beam with concentrated and distributed load

Graph for Supports Reaction of the Overhanging Beam with Concentrated and Distributed
Loads

Graph of Reaction Force [N] against W [N] when

wl [N] = 0 for aluminium
14
y = 0.576x + 0.7
R = 0.9841

Reaction Force [N]

12
10
8

R1 [N]

y = 0.332x - 0.05
R = 0.9999

R2 [N]

Linear (R1 [N])

Linear (R2 [N])

0
0

10

15
W [N]

20

25

Graph of Reaction Force [N] against W [N] when

wl [N] = 0 for steel
16
Reaction Force [N]

14

y = 0.71x - 1
R = 0.9931

12
10

R1 [N]

y = 0.292x + 0.35
R = 0.9887

8
6

R2 [N]
Linear (R1 [N])

Linear (R2 [N])

2
0
0

10

15

20

25

W [N]

Graph of Reaction Force [N] against W [N] when

wl [N] = 0 for brass
Reaction Force [N]

12
y = 0.522x + 0.35
R = 0.9998

10
8

R1 [N]

y = 0.44x
R = 1

R2 [N]

Linear (R1 [N])

Linear (R2 [N])

0
0

10

15

20

25

W [N]

Graph 1, 2, 3: graph of Reaction Force [N] against W [N] when wl [N] = 0 for aluminium,
steel, and brass.

Graph of Reaction Force [N] against W [N] when wl [N]

= 20 for aluminium
Reaction Force [N]

50
y = 1.6x + 6.6
R = 1

40
30

R1 [N]

20

R2 [N]

y = -0.628x + 13.95
R = 0.9991

10

Linear (R1 [N])

Linear (R2 [N])

0
0

10

15

20

25

W [N]

Graph of Reaction Force [N] against W [N] when wl [N]

= 20 for steel
Reaction Force [N]

50
y = 1.608x + 6.65
R = 1

40
30

R1 [N]
R2 [N]

20

y = -0.628x + 13.1
R = 0.9913

10

Linear (R1 [N])

Linear (R2 [N])

0
0

10

15

20

25

W [N]

Graph of Reaction Force [N] against W [N] when wl [N]

= 20 for brass
Reaction Force [N]

50
y = 1.626x + 8.75
R = 1

40
30

R1 [N]
R2 [N]

20
y = -0.446x + 9.5
R = 0.9717

10

Linear (R1 [N])

Linear (R2 [N])

0
0

10

15
W [N]

20

25

Graph 4,5,6 : Graph of Reaction Force [N] against W [N] when wl [N] = 20 for aluminium,
steel, and brass.

Graph of Reaction Force [N] against wl [N]= W [N] for

aluminum
Reaction Force [N]

50
y = 1.918x + 0.05
R = 1

40
30

R1 [N]

20

R2 [N]

10

Linear (R1 [N])

y = 0.018x + 0.75
R = 0.0831

0
0

10

15

Linear (R2 [N])

20

25

wl [N]= W [N]

Graph of Reaction Force [N] against wl [N]= W [N] for

steel
Reaction Force [N]

50
y = 1.946x
R = 1

40
30

R1 [N]

20

R2 [N]
Linear (R1 [N])

10

y = 0.014x + 0.3
R = 0.363

0
0

10

15

wl [N]= W N]

Linear (R2 [N])

20

25

Graph of Reaction Force [N] against wl [N]= W [N] for

brass
Reaction Force [N]

50
y = 2.106x - 0.05
R = 1

40
30

R1 [N]

20

R2 [N]
Linear (R1 [N])

y = 0.11x - 0.3
R = 0.8655

10

Linear (R2 [N])

0
0

10

15

20

25

wl [N]= W[N]

Graph 7,8,9 : Graph of Reaction Force [N] against wl [N]= W [N] for aluminium, steel, and
brass.
DISCUSSION:
A) Supports reaction of the simply-supported beam with concentrated loads

1) Verification of equations (3) and (4):

(

( )

( ) ________ (3)

( )

( ) ________ (4)

2) Based on the graph we can observe that the trend line beam reaction toward steel,
aluminium, and brass for each case mostly similar to each other. For beam
reaction when W2= 0N the trend line reaction are similar for steel, aluminium, and
brass. The same thing goes to beam reaction when W1= 0N and W1=W2.

3) Below are the table for the theoretical values of R1 and R2, by using equations (3)
and (4).

Concentrated
load
W1 (N) W2 (N)

Theory

Steel

Brass

Aluminum

R1(N)
3.3

R2(N)
1.7

R1 (N)

R2 (N)

R1 (N)

R2 (N)

R1 (N)

R2 (N)

2.8

0.5

3.6

3.1

10

6.7

3.3

6.9

1.4

7.2

2.4

6.7

1.4

15

10.0

4.9

10.7

2.6

10.8

3.4

10.6

2.3

20

13.4

6.6

14.2

3.8

13.8

4.6

14.5

3.5

25

16.7

8.3

17.2

5.1

18.4

5.5

18.2

4.6

30

20.1

9.9

21.8

6.0

21.4

6.4

21.9

6.1

1.7

3.3

1.0

3.7

0.7

2.2

0.9

2.8

10

3.3

6.7

1.6

7.0

1.7

5.8

1.6

6.1

15

4.9

10.0

2.4

9.9

2.8

9.5

2.8

9.5

20

6.6

13.4

3.8

13.8

12.1

4.6

13.4

25

8.3

16.7

4.7

17.1

5.2

16.6

17.8

30

9.9

20.1

5.9

21.1

6.8

20.5

6.5

20.4

5.0

5.0

4.0

4.2

4.8

3.6

4.0

3.8

10

10

10.0

10.0

8.7

8.6

8.6

7.9

9.4

8.8

15

15

15.0

15.0

13.4

13.6

13.6

13

13.9

13.4

20

20

20.0

20.0

18.8

18.7

19.6

19.9

18.8

17.9

25

25

25.0

25.0

23.0

22.8

24.8

24.1

23.9

21.6

30

30

30.0

30.0

29.4

28.9

28.3

29.3

28.4

27.4

Table 1: Theoretical results compare with experiment results

The graph of theoretical values of R1 and R2 are plotted.

R1 and R2 against W1
25.000

20.000

Theory R1
Theory R2

15.000
R(N)

Steel R1
Steel R2

10.000

Brass R1
Brass R2
Aluminium R1

5.000

Aluminium R2
0.000
5

10

15

20

25

30

W1(N)

R1 and R2 against W2
25.000

20.000
Theory R1
Theory R2

15.000
R(N)

Steel R1
Steel R2
10.000

Brass R1
Brass R2
Aluminium R1

5.000

Aluminium R2
0.000
5

10

15

20
W2(N)

25

30

R1 and R2 against W1=W2

35.000
30.000
25.000

Theory R1

R(N)

Theory R2

20.000

Steel R1
Steel R2

15.000

Brass R1
Brass R2

10.000

Aluminium R1
Aluminium R2

5.000
0.000
5

10

15

20

25

30

W1=W2 (N)

Based on the graph plotted by using theoretical value calculated using equation (3)
and (4) and the experimental value, we can see that the theoretical values of R1 are the most
nearer with the experimental values. Compared to theoretical values of R2, the values showed
a lot of different than the values obtained from the experiment. This due to several error
occurred while conducted the experiment. Basically equation (3) and (4) give more accurate
theoretical values as it were calculated and have no external error. Therefore, we can verify
the experimental values by using both equations.

1) The percentage error is calculated by using the formula below :

Take R1 of aluminium as an example to calculate percentage error:

For the steel beam (R1),

Concentrated
load
W1 (N) W2 (N)

Steel,%

Brass,%

Aluminum,%

R1 (N)

R2 (N)

R1 (N)

R2 (N)

R1 (N)

R2 (N)

15.2

70.6

-9.1

41.2

6.1

41.2

10

-2.9

57.6

-7.5

27.3

57.6

15

-7

46.9

-8

30.6

-6

53.1

20

-5.9

42.4

-2.9

30.3

-8.2

47

25

-3

38.6

-10.2

33.7

-8.9

44.6

30

-8.5

39.4

-6.5

35.4

-8.9

38.4

41.2

-12.1

58.8

33.3

47.1

15.2

10

51.5

-4.5

48.5

13.4

51.5

15

51

42.9

42.9

20

42.4

-3

39.4

7.5

30.3

25

43.4

-2.4

37.3

0.6

39.8

-6.6

30

40.4

-5

31.3

-2

34.3

-1.5

15.2

70.6

-9.1

41.2

6.1

41.2

10

10

-2.9

57.6

-7.5

27.3

57.6

15

15

-7

46.9

-8

30.6

-6

53.1

20

20

-5.9

42.4

-2.9

30.3

-8.2

47

25

25

-3

38.6

-10.2

33.7

-8.9

44.6

30

30

-8.5

39.4

-6.5

35.4

-8.9

38.4

These results were affected by several errors during the experiment. Those factors are:

i.

The parallax error occurred when we taking the readings from the dial gauge.

ii.

The concentrated load might not place on the exact point which it should be
placed according to the lab manual due to some human error when placing the
concentrated load. As a result, the reactions R1 and R2 obtained from the
experiment are slightly different from the theoretical values.

iii.

There should be some frictions at the contact point between the load cells and
the beam which have caused some errors for the load cell to determine the
exact weight of the concentrated loads.

B) Supports Reaction of the Overhanging Beam with Concentrated and Distributed

Loads
1) Verification of equations (7) and (8):
Total equation of force:
R1 + R2 = wl +W __________ (5)
Total moment at R2:

R1 (l + l) + Wl = wl ( l + l) _________ (6)
R1 = 2/3 (wl W) _________ (7)

Then substitute R1 into equation (5): R2 = wl + W - R1

R2 = wl + W 2/3 (wl W)
R2 = 1/3 (wl - 5W) _________ (8)
We know l = L/4
Then substitute l = L/4 into R1 and R2 equation
R1 =2/3[(w L/4)W] _______ (10)
R2=1/3 (w L/4- 5W) _______ (11)
The theoretical values of reactions force R1 and R2 can obtained from the equations
(10) and (11). Substitute the L, w, and W into the equations in order to get R1 and R2.
Length of beam is measured and the distance of R 1 and R2 from the center of beam is
calculated as below:
R1 = L/4 from center of beam and R2 = L/8 from center of beam.

2) According to the graph, we can observe that the trend line of reaction force for steel,
aluminium, and brass for each cases almost similar to each other. In experiment of
reaction force when wl= 0N we can observe that the trend line for R1 for each beam is

almost similar, however the trend line R2 for brass does not showed similarity
compared to other. As the trend line for other condition all of it showed similarity
when compared to each other. Only trend line R2 for brass when wl= 0N deviated
compared to other beams, this might due to some error occurred during the
experiment.

3) Theoretical calculation of R1 and R2 are by using equation (10) and (11) which are
derived from equation (7) and (8):

(
Concentrated
load
W1 (N) W2 (N)

Theory

Steel

R1(N)
R2(N)
R1 (N)
R2 (N)
1.833
0.917
0
5
5.970
3.900
-1.500
-7.417
0
10
2.270
12.300
-4.833
-15.750
0
15
-1.610
20.900
2.750
1.375
0
20
8.730
6.000
-0.583
-6.958
20
5
5.100
14.300
-3.917
-15.292
20
10
1.450
22.700
-7.250
-23.625
20
15
-2.410
31.400
3.667
1.833
20
20
11.990
7.600
0.333
-6.500
5
5
7.940
16.400
-3.000
-14.833
10
10
4.520
24.600
-6.333
-23.167
15
15
0.790
32.800
-9.667
-31.500
20
20
-3.090
41.800
Table 10: Theoretical results compare with experiment results

The graph of theoretical values of R1 and R2 are plotted.

R1 and R2 against W1,W2=10

30.000
25.000
20.000

R(N)

15.000
10.000

Theory R1

5.000

Theory R2

0.000
-5.000

Steel R1
10

15

20

Steel R2

-10.000
-15.000
-20.000

W1

Graph 1

Based on graph 1, we can observed that there is not much differ between theoretical and
experimental values for R1, however for R2 we can observe a large deviation between
theoretical and experimental values. These result may be affected due to some error during
the process of experiment.

R1 and R2 against W2,W1=10

25
20
15

R(N)

10

Theory R1

Theory R2

0
-5

10

Steel R1
Steel R2

-10
-15
-20

W2

Based on this graph we can see that both theoretical and experimental values have different
slope from each other for both R1 and R2. To conclude, the experimental result does not obey
the theoretical result.

R1 and R2 against W1=W2

50.000
40.000
30.000
Axis Title

20.000

Theory R1

10.000

Theory R2

0.000
-10.000

10

15

20

Steel R1
Steel R2

-20.000
-30.000
-40.000

Axis Title

From the graph we can observe that the experimental result and the theoretical result showed
the same pattern and almost similar to each other, but for R2 both result differ from each other
and have a large gap between them. This might due to error during the experiment.

4) These results were affected by several errors during the experiment. Those factors are:

1) The parallax error occurred when we taking the readings from the dial gauge.
2) The concentrated load might not place on the exact point which it should be
placed according to the lab manual due to some human error when placing the
concentrated load.
3) A level should added to the backboard and the backboard is movable so that
we can adjust the two supports so that they are at the same level before
starting the experiment.

Conclusion:
The support reaction in simply-supported and overhanging beams has been identified. The
understanding of beam apparatus has been understood and the sensitivity also accuracy of
beam has been determined.

Reference:
1. Mechanics of Materials, Seventh SI Edition, R.C Hibbeler, Pearson.
2. Engineering Mechanics Statics, Tenth Edition in SI Units, R.C Hibbeler, Pearson.
3. William D Callister, JR.(1999). Materials Science and Engineering an Introduction,
4th edition. John Willey & Sons, Inc.