ME2114-2 Combined

Bending & Torsion

Seah Wei Ren Andrew (2G1)
A0140799R
30/03/16

1 Objective
To conduct an experiment to verify the bending and torsion theory by strain
measurement. It is also to verify that calculation of stress using super positioning is
valid.

Sample Calculation
E=86.3 GPa =0.3614 P=0.5kg
a = (1 + 4) (2 + 3) = (23 + 12) (-10 + 26) = 71 * 10-6
b = (1 +2) (3+4) = (23 - 10) (-26 + 12) = 27 * 10-6
Experimental:

E ( 1 4 ) 86.3 109 (2312) 106

x=
=
= 1.487 MPa
1
103614
E( 1 2) 86.3 109 (23+10) 106
xy =
=
= 1.046 MPa
2(1+ )
2(1+ 0.3614)

Theoretical:

x=

32bP 32 0.1 0.5 9.81

=
= 1.243 MPa
D3
0.01593

xy =

16 aP 16 0.15 0.5 9.81

=
= 0.932 MPa
D3
0.01593

Results
Cross
Sectional
Area(mm2
)

Diameter of Tensile Test

Piece(mm)
D1

D2
9.61

Daverage
9.58

9.6

72.38

Table 1
Load, P
(N)

Direct
Stress, x
(MPa)

Longitudi
nal
Strain, x

0
2.76
5.52
8.29
11.05
13.81
16.57

0
38
67
97
130
162
195

0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200

Transver
se
Strain,
y
0
-24
-35
-44
-54
-65
-74

Table 2
Load, P
(kg)
1
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3

2
0
23
46
69
94
118
140

Strain (10^-6)
3
0
-10
-21
-32
-42
-52
-63

4
0
-26
-51
-74
-99
-120
-144

0
12
24
36
48
60
72

Table 3
Load, P
(kg)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
a

Quarter Bridge
Full bridge
configuration
configuration
a/10^-6 b/10^-6 a/10^-6 b/10^-6
0
0
0
0
71
27
71
26
142
52
142
52
211
75
212
78
283
103
281
104
350
126
350
130
419
149
422
155
b

0.15 m

0.1 m

d
0.0159 m

Table 4
Load, P
(kg)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3

Bending Stress
Theoreti Experimen
cal
tal
0.000
0.000
1.243
1.487
2.486
2.973
3.729
4.460
4.972
6.216
6.215
7.838
7.458
9.189

Shear Stress
Theoreti Experime
cal
ntal
0.000
0.000
0.932
1.046
1.864
2.124
2.797
3.201
3.729
4.311
4.661
5.388
5.593
6.434

Graphs
Longitudinal Stress vs Longitudinal Strain
(Graph 1)
18
16

f(x) = 0.08x

14
12
10

Longitudunal Stress

8
6
4
2
0

50

100

150

200

250

Logitudinal Strain

E=0.0848
Gpa
Transverse Strain vs Longitudinal Strain
(Graph 2)
0
-10

0 f(x) = 50
- 0.41x 100

150

200

250

-20
-30

Transverse Strain

-40
-50
-60
-70
-80

Logitudinal Strain

V=0.3614

Bending Stress vs Load (Graph 3)

10.000
Experimental 8.000

Linear (Experimental)

Theoretical

6.000

Bending Stress

4.000

2.000
Linear (Theoretical)
0.000

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

Load

Shear Stress vs Load

(Graph4)
7.000
Experimental
6.000

Linear (Experimental)

Theoretical

5.000
4.000

Shear Stress 3.000

2.000
Linear (Theoretical)
1.000
0.000

0.5

1.5

Load

2.5

3.5

Load vs a
(Graph 5)
3.5
Quarter Bridge
3

Linear (Quarter Bridge)

Full Bridge

2.5
2

Load 1.5
1
Linear (Full Bridge)
0.5
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Load vs b
(Graph 6)
3.5
Quarter Bridge
3

Linear (Quarter Bridge)

Full Bridge

2.5
2

Load 1.5
1
Linear (Full Bridge)
0.5
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Discussion
1) Both experimental values for bending and shear stress is higher than
theoretical values. It could be due to the following reason.
- It may be caused errors like applying force too quickly, so the result may
not be stable when taken.
- It may also be caused by the wear of equipment used. Long term usage of
same shaft may cause deformation already existing before experiment
was done, and worn strain gauges may not be exactly at 45. Therefore,
results may not be accurate.
- Rounding and human errors while measuring diameter.

Another reason can be because the weight of the moment bar a is not
taken into account when calculating the bending stress and torsion shear.

2) The results in B5 represents bending strain. Since the values are positive it
represents tensile strain.
3) Other methods of determining elastic constant can be by
- By using uniaxial compression method, this method is similar to the
uniaxial tension method by measuring the longitudinal and transverse
strain and obtaining the elastic constant from the gradient of the stress
strain graph and strain graph.
- Another method is to bend the rod and record the normal strain. And find
M and I with the load applied, then using

Mr
I

find stress and obtain

E from the stress strain graph. After that, we use the same rod and apply
torque to it and measure the angle of twist and use
and finally obtain Poissons ratio with the formula

=
G=

TL
GJ

E
2(1+ )

to obtain G

Conclusion
In conclusion, due to several factors the experimental results deviate slightly from
the theoretical results. However, the results are very close, therefore it can be said
that the theory of bending and torsion is valid and superposition method is valid.