DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
CEMB121 MECHANICS OF MATERIALS LABORATORY
LABORATORY EXPERIMENT (NO. 6)
BENDING MOMENT (1)

NAME LIEW HONN YUH

ID CE 083439
SECTION SECTION 03
GROUP NO. NO. 6

GROUP MEMBERS
1. KOVIN RAJ A/L JAYAGOBI CE 083436
2. NITHIVANAN A/L SUBRAMANIAM CE 083450
3. MICHAEL TANG LOK LEE CE 083441
4. ALFRED LIM FUCHIAN CE 083420
5. LIEW HONN YUH CE 083439
LECTURER SIVAKUMAR NAGANATHAN
LAB INSTRUCTOR SITI ALIYYAH BT MASJUKI

DATE OF LABORATORY SESSION 12TH JANUARY 2010

DATE OF REPORT SUBMISSION 19TH JANUARY 2010

LAB REPORT MARKING

Performance 10 %
Cover 1%
Summary 8%
Table of content 1%
Introduction
Objective
10%
Apparatus
Materials
Procedure
Results 20%
Discussion 40%
Conclusion 10%
TOTAL 100%

1
 TABLE OF CONTENT

No. SUBJECT Page

1. SUMMARY Pg
2. INTRODUCTION

 OBJECTIVE Pg
 APPARATUS
3. PROCEDURE Pg
4. RESULTS Pg
5. CALCULATIONS Pg
6. GRAPHS Pg
7. DISCUSSION Pg
8. CONCLUSION Pg
9. REFERENCE Pg

2
SUMMARY

In this experiment, we are trying to prove that bending moment at a cut section of a beam is equal to
the algebraic sum of the moments acting to the left or right of the section. The set up of the experiment
consist of a special beam with a cut section and is placed on the simple supports provided. The span of
the beam is set by us where we fixed it at 900mm. Later on, both of the distance of the cut section from
the right support, 𝐿4 and distance of the load cell form the centre of the beam cross section which is
300mm and 175mm respectively. The indicator is switched on 10 minutes beforehand so that it would
stabilize. This experiment begins by placing different loads at different distance for each different case.
The reading on the load cell indictor is recorded for each different case. Through the reading obtained
the experimental values of the bending moment can be obtained. While the theoretical value is
obtained through the formula shown in the theory part. With both values we can compared the
difference in it. These differences are due to errors that are caused from environmental, human or
systematic errors. With the overall percentage error is determined, it shows us the difference in the
actual and theoretical value. This is especially important when it comes to the design of a reinforce
beam which is able to support external loads acting on it and being practically usable for buildings
design.

3
OBJECTIVE

To show that the bending moment at a cut section of a beam is equal to the algebraic sum of the
moments acting to the left or right of the section.

APPARATUS

1. A pair of simple supports.

2. Special beam with a cut section.

3. A set of weights with several load hangers.

THEORY

L2

W1 W2 W3
L1 x

L3 L4
RA x RB

Bending moment at a pin-connected section x – x is

B.M x – x = W1 (Beam Span – L4 – L1) + W2 (Beam Span – L4 – L2) + W3 (Beam Span – L4 – L3)
– RA (Beam Span – L4)
OR

4
 B.M x – x = RBL4

Where W = load

L = distance of load from the left support

R = reaction force from the supports

PROCEDURE

1. Connect the load cell to the digital indication.

2. Switch on the indicator. For stability of the reading the indicator must be switch on 10minutes
before taking readings
3. Fix the two simple support to the aluminum base at a distance equal to the span of the beam to
be tested. Screw the supports tightly to the base.
4. Hang the load hanger to the beam.
5. Placed the beam on the supports.
6. Placed the load hanger at the desired location.
7. Note the indicator reading. If it is not zero the tare button on the indicator.
8. Place a load on each load hanger.
9. Record the indicator reading. This represents the force at the cut section.
10. Remove all loads from the load hangers and apply a different set of loading and at different set
of loading and at different locations.
11. Repeat step 6 to 11 another 5 sets of readings.

5
RESULTS

Beam span, LX = 900 mm

Distance of the cut section from the right support, L4 = 300 mm

Distance of load cell from centre of the beam cross section = 175 mm

Table 1

Load And Its Distance From The Left Support

Load Cell
Load
W1 L1 W2 L2 W3 L3 Reading,
Case
F (N)
N mm N mm N mm

Case 1 5 170 5 360 6 790 7.59

Case 2 5 300 10 400 11 770 16.50

Case 3 10 100 5 250 15 800 10.22

Case 4 5 150 1 350 5 810 3.65

Case 5 1 100 1 200 1 300 1.07

Load Case Number RB

Case 1 8.21N

Case 2 15.52N

Case 3 15.83N

Case 4 5.72N

Case 5 0.667N

6
ANALYSIS

Calculation for 𝑅𝐵 ,

For Case 1:

Let ∑MA = 0

0 = W1L1 + W2L2 + W3L3 - LXRB

900𝑅𝐵 = 5(170) + 5(360) + 6 (790)

𝑅𝐵 = 8.21N

Calculation

For experimental

From case 1:

Experimental value = F X 175

= 8.21 X 175

= 1436.75 N.mm

For Theory:

From case 1:

6N

B.M x – x = 8.21(300) - 6(190)

= N.mm
Mcut RB

7
From case 2:

11N

B.M x – x = 15.52(300) - 11(170)

= 2786.00 N.mm
Mcut RB

From case 3:

15N

B.M x – x = 15.83(300) - 15(200)

= 1749.00 N.mm
Mcut RB

From case 4:

5N
B.M x – x = 5.72(300) - 5(210)
= 666.00 N.mm
Mcut RB

From case 5:

B.M x – x = 0.667(300)
= 200.10 N.mm
Mcut RB

8
Calculation for Percentage Error,

|𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑦−𝐸𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙|
Percentage Error = X 100%
𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑦

From Case 1:

|1323−1328.25|
Percentage Error = X 100%
1323

= 0.40 %

Load Case Bending Moment (N.mm)

Percentage Error (%)
Number Experimental (F*175) Theory

Case 1 1328.25 1323.00 0.40

Case 2 2887.50 2786.00 3.64

Case 3 1788.50 1749.00 2.26

Case 4 638.75 666.00 4.09

Case 5 187.25 200.10 6.42

9
 Comparison between Theory and Experimental
3500

3000
Bending Moment (N.mm)

2500

2000
Theoretical
1500 Experimental

1000

500

0
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5

Overall Percentage Error,

∑ 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟
Overall Percentage Error = (From Case 1 to Case 5)
5

0.40+3.64+2.26+4.09+6.42
=
5

= 3.36%

10
DISCUSSION

What actually happens when a load is applied to the beam and why does this condition occurs?

When a load is applied to the beam, the beam would physically bend downwards. This situation occurs
due to the external loading that was applied to the beam. This causes the distribution of load
throughout the beam, thus the beam bends with the contact of loading. For this experiment, it is
separated in to different cases, where we put different weight of loads at different distance from the cut
section.

Three types of forces are produced when the external loading is applied to the beam that is the shear
force, normal force and bending moment. The shear force acts on the shear section of the beam causing
both sides to slide each another in the plane of the area. Followed by normal force that acts
perpendicularly to the beam is due to the perpendicular area which tend to further or closing the gap of
the two sections. The third force acting on the beam is the bending moment that has a high tendency
that causes the rotation of the beam body about a certain axis within the area of the plane.

With all these forces that are present in the reactions of the beams, equilibrium is achieved. When
external force is applied that causes the beam to break apart is countered by the internal force that acts
throughout the beam span to prevent the beam from failing. But if the load allowed is exceeded
eventually the beam will crack thus failing the structure.

Will the readings of the load cell differ from above if it is placed at 100mm from the centre of the
cross-section? If your answer is yes by how much. If your answer is no, then why.

Yes, the reading of the load cell will differ by 75% for every case of load.

Load (N) Experimental Load Cell Predicted Bending

reading, (F X 175) Moment (F X 100)
(N.mm) (N.mm)
Case 1 759.00
1328.25

Case 2 1650.00
2887.50

Case 3 1022.00
1788.50

Case 4 365.00
638.75
Case 5 107.00
187.25

11
Comment on the accuracy of the experiment.

The theoretical value and the experimental value differ due the errors that are committed by human or
the environmental changes. Therefore causing low accuracies in the percentage error that is obtained.
These errors can be minimized or higher accuracy can be obtained by taking several precautions
throughout the experiment. The average percentage error for this experiment is 3.36%.

State the probable factors that affect the accuracy of the experiment.

As previously stated, errors occurs in this experiment. One of the probable factors is the sensitivity of
the load cell indicator. Most of the time students tend to begin the experiment straight away after
switching on the indicator. Most of us should take notice that the indicator should be allowed to
stabilize itself by leaving it switched on for 10 minutes before conducting the experiment. Also when
conducting the experiment makes sure there are no vibrations that cause the settings of the beam
structure to move. This slightest movement causes changes in the reading and causes inaccuracies.
Other than that human error also affects the reading of the indicator. People who are passing by the
beam structure causes wind movement and thus vibration in the air. By making sure that there are no
vibrations and movements we are able to minimize the inaccuracies in the reading obtained.

The next error occurs with our own carelessness. By miscalculating the distance of the load from the
shear section makes the theoretical value and experimental value totally going off the charts. We might
also encounter extreme values in some of our readings. To remove any of these errors, the whole
experiment is repeated a few times so that we can exclude the extreme values. Also by taking the
average readings, the error is lessened and we are able to obtain a higher accuracy result.

12
CONCLUSION

A beam prevents itself from changing its normal state when external load is applied on it. These
particular forces are shear force, normal force and bending force. Through our calculations, we are able
to see the differences in the theoretical and experimental of the bending moment values. The overall
error percentage obtained is 3.36%. In conclusion, the bending moment at a cut section of a beam is
equal to the algebraic sum of the moment acting to the left or right of the section. With this knowledge
we are able to design a structure with the usage of reinforce beam with the capability to withstand
external forces without losing its balance.

Reference:

1. Mechanics of Materials, SI Second Edition by R.C. Hibbeler.

2. Laboratory Manual, Department of Civil Engineering, Universiti Tenaga Nasional

13