CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

REACTION OF A CONTINUOUS BEAM

No. I/C No. Name

1. 990813-06-5465 MUHAMMAD NAJMUDDIN ALIFF BIN NAZERI
2. 990520-14-5795 MUHAMMAD FARIS HAZIM BIN HASNUN NIZA
3. 990219-01-7081 AHMAD FIKRI BIN ALIAS
4. 991006-10-5939 MUHAMMAD AZAM BIN FESOL
Section / Group 03-DDWA (GROUP 4)
Lecturer’s Name PUAN NURUL ALIFAH BINTI JATARONA

Item Mark Mark Mark

Introduction 2
Objective 5
Equipment 25 5
Theory 5
Procedures 8
Data / Table 10
Data Analysis / C.P / 15
35
Graph
Results of Experiment 10
Discussions 20
Conclusion 10
35
Suggestions/ 5
Comments
Reference/ Attachment 5 5
Total 100 100
REACTIONS OF A CONTINUOUS BEAM

INTRODUCTION

Continuous beam is a statically indeterminate multi span beam on hinged support.

The end spans may be cantilever may be freely supported or fixed supported. At least
one of the supports of a continuous beam must be able to develop a reaction along the
beam axis.
Several methods had been used to solve the reactions of statically indeterminate
beam. For theory, students are advised to use Virtual Work Method, Slope deflection
Method or Moment Distribution Method to find reactions of a continuous beam.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the reactions of a two-span continuous beam.

APPARATUS

The apparatus comprises of:

1) A support frame
2) 3 nos. reaction support pier
3) 2 nos. load hangers
4) Beam specimen
5) A meter ruler to measure the span of the beam
6) A set of weight
THEORY

A beam is a structural member designed primarily to support forces acting perpendicular

to the axis of the member

Beams are of different types, the most common types of beams are:
 Fixed End Beam (indeterminate)
 Continuous beam (indeterminate)
 Simple beam (determinate)

A fixed end beam that is restricted from movement at both ends. A continuous
beam is a statically indeterminate structure. They are used to increase structures strength
and provide alternate load paths in cases of failure. They are used to increase structure
strength and provide alternate load paths in cases of failure. A continuous beam has
advantages over a simple beam in terms of lesser mid span deflection which is less and
a higher vertical load capacity.

A pinned support is a type of support that can resist both horizontal and vertical
force, the experiment was carried out in the structures laboratory with group.

The analysis of continuous beam will be carried out using the elastic theory. Since
in a continuous beam there both positive and negative moments, and in other parts of the
beam both negative and positive moments are present, the stiffness methods are used
and the moments distribution method to find the reaction at the supports.

Moment Distribution Method is created by prof Hardy Cros at 1932. Advantages of

this method are using equation in solution, more mechanical process and can be checked
easily and quickly. Furthermore, the accuracy depends on the equilibrium and distribution
process that has been done.
PROCEDURE

1) The display unit is switched on to warm up the unit.

2) The reaction piers are clamped to the support frame using the place and bolt
supplied with the apparatus and at predetermine distant between the supports.
3) The beam specimen is placed between the two cylindrical pieces of each support.
The two screws are tightened at the top of each support with finger.
4) The load hanger is fixed at the position where the beam is to be loaded.
5) The load cell is connected from the support pier to the display unit with each load
cell occupying one terminal on the display.
6) Beginning with channel 1 record the initial reading for each channel.
7) A suitable load is placed on the hanger and the readings of each load cell are
recorded.
8) Step 8 is repeated for load 20kN,25kN,30kN and 35kN.

LL LR

XL XR

RESULTS

Left-hand span of beam, LL = 400 mm

Right-hand span of beam, LR = 400 mm

Distance of load from left-hand support, XL = 200 mm

Distance of load from right-hand support, XR = 200 mm

Table 1 : Reaction at the support

Support reaction Theory

Load on Load on
LL (N) LR(N) Right Middle Right Middle
Left (N) Left (N)
(N) (N) (N) (N)

15 15 5.8 18.12 4.64 4.69 20.8 4.69

20 20 7.2 24.20 6.22 6.25 27.5 6.25

25 25 9.0 30.16 7.8 7.8 34.5 7.8

30 30 10.9 36.202 9.32 9.38 41.25 9.38

35 35 12.7 42.20 10.92 10.94 48.12 10.94

Calculation and Results

1) Draw the beam and indicate the positions and direction of load. Give all important
dimensions.

2) Derive the reactions at the supports.

3) Using the tabulated data :

i. Plot the graph of reaction against load for each support.

ii. Draw the best fit curve through the plotted points.

iii. Using the sloe of the graph, calculate the percentage error between the
experimental the theoretical reaction.
QUESTIONS

1) If the material of the beam is changed from steel to aluminum, how does this affect
the support reaction? Give reasons for your answer.

If the material of the beam is changed from steel to aluminum, the support reaction
will increase. This is because the aluminum is milder than the steel. So, the more
loading that is put to the beam will make it overloaded and fail. Changing from steel
to aluminium also will affect the deflection of the beam as the elastic modulus of
aluminium is about 1/3 of steel, for the same loading, the same span and support
conditions. The aluminium beam deflection will be three times more. However, the
density of steel is coincidentally about three times more than that of aluminium and
so the beam of steel will be three times heavier.

2) If a thinner beam is used, how does this affect the support reaction? Give reasons for
your answer.

If the thinner beam is used, the support reaction will also increase. This is because
the thinner beam is not stronger like thicker beam. So, the more loading that is put to
the beam will make it bending and fail.

𝑏ℎ3
𝐼=
12

Based on the equation, when the height of the beam decrease, then the moment of
inertia also decreases. when the moment of inertia decreases, it will increase the
amount of deflection in a stiffness test

3) How does the experimental reactions compare with theoretical?

 The graphs produced display a similar trend when the two values (load at left
and right) are compared.

For the left support reaction, the percentage error is 0.28% as compared to
the experimental and theoretical reaction. The gradient of the experimental Is the
same with theoretical which is 0.31.

For the right support reaction, the percentage error is negative between
experimental and theory which is 16.2%. The gradient of the experimental is 0.37,
while theory is 0.31.

Lastly, the support reaction at the middle, the percentage error is positive
between the experimental and theory which is 14.16%. The gradient of the
experimental is lower than theory which is respectively 1.20 and 1.37

4) State the possible factors that might have influenced your results and possible means
of overcoming it.

There are a few factors that can affect the results such as the usage of old equipment.
This may have lead to the readings that were taken from the experiment becomes
inaccurate Next, a factor that can influence this experiment is by human factor. When
there is vibration at the experiment cause by human interactions, the reading will change
and therefore effect the experiment. Third, the load at the left and the right is not being
placed at the same time. This will affect the final result and might have problems. Finally,
the load hanger and the beam are not fixed and can moving. This will result in an
unstable reading which can be higher or lower.
CONCLUSIONS

Based on the experiment that we have conducted, we can conclude that the value
of the reaction at the right and the left support supposedly be the same. However, due to
some error, the value we got is slightly different from the value of theory. Furthermore,
the value of the reaction at the middle is the biggest. This shows that the middle support
will support more loading compared to the left and right support and the total load that
supported by the beam is equal to the total reaction at the three supports since the
continuous beam is in equilibrium.

COMMENTS

Comment and Suggestion

1. Make sure that all the screws are tightened properly to avoid the beam and the
load hanger from moving.
2. Take the reading at the indicator only when the indicator is stop or the reading is
stable.
3. The distance of the load and the support must be at the correct measurement.
4. The load should be on the static state during the reading is taken.
5. The reading on the indicator should always be zero before placing any load on the
beam so that it will not affect the value of the data.
6. Put the loads slowly at the load hanger to prevent the damage to the indicator.

REFERENCES

1) Structural Labsheet Civil Laboratory 2 2018/2019/1 UTM KL.

2) Mekanik Bahan dan Struktur, Yusof Ahmad (2001).
3) http://www.academia.edu/9659068/EXPERIMENTAL_SET_UP_FOR_CONTINUOU
S_BEAM
4) https://www.scribd.com/document/331673066/Reaction-of-a-Continuous-Beam-2
5) http://www.geom.uiuc.edu/education/calc-init/static-beam/material.html
APPENDICEs

figure 1 shows the setting of apparatus figure 2 show najmuddin measure

the thickness of frame

figure 3 show the experiment running figure 4 show faris measure

the thickness of the frame