Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
M. Tech 2011-13
Structural Engineering
Report submitted by
Exp. Page
No. Date Name of the Experiment No.
13 24.10.2011 Determination of ‘E’ and ‘µ’ by Bending Test on Acrylic Flat 138
Using Electrical Strain Gauges
EXPERIMENT 1
R = ρL/A
We can classify strain gauges into three types
1. One element type
2. Two element type
3. Three element type
1
1.1.2 Two Element Type
One element strain gauges are generally used in uniaxial members whereas for
measuring strains in biaxial stress cases or the cases accomplished with shear, two element
type strain gauges are used. For calculation of biaxial strains, 60mm strain gauges with two
elements arranged in 1800 and for calculation of shear, they will be arranged in right angle, as
shown in Fig. 1.2 We can find strains with sensitivity 1µm/1µm.
2
1.2.1 Deflection Measurement
Dial gauges are generally used devices to measure lateral linear deformations. It is a
gauge consisting of a circular graduated dial and a pointer actuated by a member that contact
with the part being calibrated
Working principle: The Dial gauge indicator measures displacement at an angle of a
lever or plunger perpendicular to the axis of the indicator. A regular dial indicator measures
linear displacement along that axis.
3
1.2.4 Circular Dial Gauge
This is a type of dial gauge, used to measure large deformations such as deformations
in tensile test of steel using UTM. Range of this dial gauge is 1 meter in linear deformations
and 0.7 meter in torsion deformation. Its sensitivity is 1mm.
Principle of Extensometer
The electronic extensometers made according to resistance strain principle, and have
YYU, YYJ two series. It has good stability and easy to operate. It have became the essential
sensor for strain automatic testing and been widely used in various academies, scientific
research institutes, factories, laboratories. There are many different models, but the principle
depends on measuring differential movement.
Types of Extensometer
Based on the type and application, it is classified into various types. In our laboratory, we
have two types:
1. Lateral Extensometer
2. Vertical Extensometer
1. Lateral Extensometer
The electrical lateral extensometer serves for measuring of changes of thickness. It is
used in connection with a normal strain-gauge bridge. The devices consist of four strain
gauges which are place in the middle of the bar of inner frame, two on top and two on
bottom. They are wired to a full bridge. Their leads are connected with a connector that is
placed on the outer shell.
4
Fig. 1.7 lateral extensometer
1.4.1 Compressometer
The Compressometer is used for evaluating deformation and strain characteristics of
concrete cylinders while undergoing compression testing. The Compressometer consists of
two frames for clamping to thespecimens by means of three tightening screws with a
hardened and tapered end. These are screwed to bottom frame at an angle of 120o.
The Compressometer utilizes a calibrated spring and two indicators to effect the
measurement. The upper indicator measures the stretch of the spring and directly related to
the force applied to the spring and the lower indicator measures the changes in thickness of
the material being sampled.
5
1.5.1 Optical
It is a bubble usage instrument. Optical inclinometer ranges from 0 to 360 degrees.
Readings are static and only one reading can be measured. L.C. is 0.2”
6
1.6.3 Description
Microscope is high quality product designed for measuring crack widths, both in
concrete as well as other materials. British made, this high definition microscope is connected
to adjustable light source that provides a well - illuminated image under all working
conditions
1.6.4 Specifications
Magnification x 40
Measuring range: 4 mm
Divisions: 0.02 mm
Hydraulic load cells are force -balance devices, measuring weight as a change in
pressure of the internal filling fluid. In a rolling diaphragm type hydraulic load cell, a load or
force acting on a loading head is transferred to a piston that in turn compresses a filling fluid
confined within an elastomeric diaphragm chamber. As force increases, the pressure of the
7
hydraulic fluid rises. This pressure can be locally indicated or transmitted for remote
indication or control. Output is linear and relatively unaffected by the amount of the filling
fluid or by its temperature. Because this sensor has no electric components, it is ideal for use
in hazardous areas. Typical hydraulic load cell applications include tank, bin, and hopper
weighing. For maximum accuracy, the weight of the tank should be obtained by locating one
load cell at each point of support and summing their outputs.
8
lower internal and external bosses are machined as an integral part of the ring to avoid
mechanical interferences during the application of the force.To read the diameter of the ring,
the vibrating reed is set in motion by gently tapping it with a pencil. As the reed is vibrating,
the micrometer screw on the spindle is adjusted until the button on the spindle just contacts
the vibrating reed, dampening out its vibrations. When this occurs a characteristic buzzing
sound is produced. At this point a reading of the micrometer dial indicates the diameter of the
ring. The number of divisions on the micrometer dial and the graduation of the vernier index
vary by type of proving ring.
9
1.8.2 Fundamental Principle
The Schmidt hammer test is usually used for measuring the uniformity and relative
quality of concrete in the structure. It means that the rebound hammer is principally a surface
hardness tester. It works on the principle that the rebound of an elastic mass depends on the
hardness of the surface against which the mass impinges. There is little apparent theoretical
relationship between the strength of concrete and the rebound number of the hammer.
However, within limits, empirical correlations have been established between strength
properties and the rebound number.
1.8.3 Equipment
The rebound hammer consists of a spring control hammer that slides on a plunger within a
tubular housing. When the plunger is pressed against the surface of the concrete, the mass
rebound from the plunger. It retracts against the force of the spring. The hammer impacts
against the concrete and the spring control mass rebounds, taking the rider with it along the
guide scale. By pushing a button, the rider can be held in position to allow the reading to be
taken. The distance travelled by the mass, is called the rebound number. It is indicated by the
rider moving along a graduated scale.
10
1.10 Pulse Velocity Test
1.10.1 Fundamental Principle
A pulse of longitudinal vibrations is produced by an electro-acoustical transducer,
which is held in contact with one surface of the concrete under test. When the pulse generated
is transmitted into the concrete from the transducer using a liquid coupling material such as
grease or cellulose paste, it undergoes multiple reflections at the boundaries of the different
material phases within the concrete. A complex system of stress waves develops, which
include both longitudinal and shear waves, and propagates through the concrete. The first
waves to reach the receiving transducer are the longitudinal waves, which are converted into
an electrical signal by a second transducer. Electronic timing circuits enable the transit time T
of the pulse to be measured.
Longitudinal pulse velocity (in km/s or m/s) is given by:
V=
Where v is the longitudinal pulse velocity, L is the path length, T is the time taken by the
pulse to traverse that length.
1.10.3 Applications
Measurement of the velocity of ultrasonic pulses of longitudinal vibrations passing
through concrete may be used for the following applications:
1. Determination of the uniformity of concrete in and between members
2. Measurement of changes occurring with time in the properties of concrete
3. Correlation of pulse velocity and strength as a measure of concrete quality.
4. Determination of the modulus of elasticity and dynamic Poisson's ratio of the
concrete.
11
The velocity of an ultrasonic pulse is influenced by those properties of concrete which
determine its elastic stiffness and mechanical strength. The variations obtained in a set of
pulse velocity measurements made along different paths in a structure reflect a corresponding
variation in the state of the concrete. When a region of low compaction, voids or damaged
material is present in the concrete under test, a corresponding reduction in the calculated
pulse velocity occurs and this enables the approximate extent of the imperfections to be
determined. As concrete matures or deteriorates, the changes, which occur with time in its
structure, are reflected in either an increase or a decrease, respectively, in the pulse velocity.
This enables changes to be monitored by making tests at appropriate intervals of time. Pulse
velocity measurements made on concrete structures may be used for quality control purposes.
In comparison with mechanical tests on control samples such as cubes or cylinders, pulse
velocity measurements have the advantage that they relate directly to the concrete in the
structure rather than to samples, which may not be always truly representative of the concrete
in situ. Ideally, pulse velocity should be related to the results of tests on structural
components and, if a correlation can be established with the strength or other required
properties of these components, it is desirable to make use of it. Such correlations can often
be readily established directly for pre-cast units and can also be found for in situ work.
Empirical relationships may be established between the pulse velocity and both the dynamic
and static elastic moduli and the strength of concrete. The latter relationship is influenced by
a number of factors including the type of cement, cement content, admixtures, type and size
of the aggregate, curing conditions and age of concrete. Caution should be exercised when
attempting to express the results of pulse velocity tests in terms of strengths or elastic
properties, especially at strengths exceeding 60 MPa.
12
EXPERIMENT 2
2.1 Objective
The main objective of this experiment is to cast different reinforced cement concrete
beams for flexural, shear and torsion tests and reinforced cement concrete column and cubes for
pull-out test and compressive test.
2.2 Materials
Cement (53grade), Sand, Coarse aggregate, Water and Reinforced bars (Fe250 & Fe415).
2.3 Equipment
Rotary Mixer machine (250 liters capacity), Needle vibrator, Weighing machine, Tape or
Scale, Spade and trowel, Trolley and Steel and wooden shuttering
13
Table2.1 Details of RCC and PCC Members
14
2-6mmφ (Hanger)
2L-6mmφ @ 80mm bars)
c/c
200mm
650mm
700mm
650mm
150mm
2L-6mmφ @ 120mm 2-10mmφ
2-6mmφ (Hanger)
2L-6mmφ @ 80mm
c/c
200mm
150mm
650mm 700mm 650mm
2-20mmφ
2L-6mmφ @ 120mm
Fig. 2.2 Over Reinforced Beam
2L-6mmφ
2L-6mmφ 2-10mmφ
125 mm c/c
90 mm c/c
200mm
150mm
3-16mmφ
No Stirrups for 600 mm 700 mm
700mm
150 mm
150 mm
Cube (P.C.C)
150mmx150mmx150mm
16
2.5 Experimental Procedure
The mould for the given sketch is prepared and the surface of mould is oiled. The
fabricated reinforcement as per details given is placed inside the mould. The Mix is prepared in
two batches since the capacity of mixer is only 250litres. It is well mixed in the mixer machine
for two to three minutes. Then the well mixed concrete has to be poured in each specimen
formwork and is compacted with needle vibrator adequately. After the compaction of concrete,
the surface is imparted with a smooth finish and left undisturbed for 24 hrs. After 24 hrs, the
formwork has shall be removed and the specimen is to be cured for 28 days.
17
Fig. 2.6 Pull-Out Test Reinforcement Setup
2.6 Result
Reinforced cement concrete beams, columns, standard concrete cubes and flexural beams
have been cast.
18
EXPERIMENT 3
3.1 Objective
3.2 Apparatus
3.3 Theory
The characteristics of wave generated are recorded using the crystal type
accelerometer and inductance type accelerometer. When a vibrating load is applied
the response in terms of displacements, acceleration and velocity varies with time.
Dynamic test was done on a steel cantilever beam. Vibration was given to a cantilever
steel beam. It vibrates with maximum amplitude initially. Due to damping the
amplitude slowly diminishes. Impulse load was applied using hammer. Hammer was
given an impact by forcing against a hard surface & the characteristics of the wave
generated were observed.
where,
u&& = accleration of the system
ζ = damping ratio of the system
u = displacement
ω n = natural frequency of the system
p(t) = external force
c
ζ = ,
cr
19
Logarithmic decrement is given by
ui 2πζ
δ = ln =
u i +1 1−ζ 2
Where, u i , u i +1are two sucessive peak values
since 1 − ζ 2 is avery small, δ = 2π ,
if over n cycles th amplitude reduces from u i to u n +1 then dampinf ratio is given by
1 u
ζ = ln 1
2nπ u n +1
The amplitudes can be substituted in terms of voltage output i.e., v1 and v2
Sample out put taken from the oscilloscope for a vibrating beam is depicted and
damping ratio is calculated as below:
3.4 Observation
3.5 Result
3.6 Conclusion
According to IS:1893-2002, the damping ratio varies between 2 to 5% for
steel. We experimentally obtained the damping ratio for steel as 5.6% which is
comparable.
20
EXPERIMENT 4
4.1 Objective
4.2 Apparatus
4.3 Specimens
High tensile steel rod of 25mm diameter, HYSD steel rods of 10mm, 12mm
and 16mm diameter, Mild steel rod of 6mm diameter
4.4 Theory
Stress is the force causing the deformation divided by the area to which the
force is applied; and strain is the ratio of the change caused by the stress to the
original state of the object.
Poisson's ratio (µ) is the ratio of the relative contraction strain, or transverse
strain, normal to the applied load, divided by the relative extension strain, or axial
strain in the direction of the applied load. When the material is compressed or
elongated along the axial direction:
Lateral strain
Poisson's ratio (µ) =
Axial strain
21
4.4.3 Strain Gauges
Strain gauges are used to measure strains at a point. The principles involved in
strain gauge construction can be used as a basis for classifying the gauges into
following groups:
The gage size for a mechanical strain gage is characterized by the distance
between the two knife edges in contact with the specimen (the gage length) and by the
width of the movable knife edge (the gage width). Huggenberger extensometer is the
most popular and one of the most accurate mechanical strain gages in use today. An
extensometer is equipped with knife edges and a wire spring that forces the knife
edges into tension. Elongation or compression of the specimen causes movement of
arms. As the arms move, they bend a flexural member, which is the sensing element,
also provides good stability and requires low actuating forces.
The extensometer provides an accurate response to specimen strain with
maximum non-linearity of 0.3 percent of range and maximum hysteretic of only 0.1
percent of range. This strain gauge measures strain under static or gradually varying
loading conditions. Care should also be exercised in keeping the instrument in
calibration.
In this experiment extensometers have been used, which gives the extensions
in mm (up to a least count of 0.01mm) and from which strains were calculated by
dividing the extension by inter-distance of jaws.
The electrical strain gauges are more accurate, lower in cost, and easier to use.
The most important electrical strain gauge is resistance type(ERSG). Two less
commonly employed electrical strain gauges are capacitance type and the inductance
type.
The principle of electrical strain gauge is based on the measurement of
changes in resistance, capacitance or inductance that is proportional to the strain
transferred from the specimen to the basic gauge element. The electrical resistance
strain gauge approaches the requirements for an optimum system. It exhibits the ideal
characteristics for range, sensitivity, gauge length and precision. Electrical-resistance
strain gages are widely used in stress-analysis work. ERSG are also widely used as
sensors in transducers to measure strain, displacement, load, torque, pressure and
acceleration. Resistance of the wire changes as a function of the strain. Resistance of a
wire increases with increasing strain and decreases with decreasing strain. Different
materials have different sensitivities. Wheatstone bridge can be used to measure the
resistance changes accurately. Bonded-foil gauge monitored with a wheat stone
bridge has become a highly perfected measure system.
For the capacitor gauge, the sensitivity and accuracy are quite sufficient for
application to the general problem of determining strain distributions. The primary
22
disadvantage is its relatively large size and its mechanical attachment through knife
edges. The differential transformer system is a type of inductance strain gauge. It is
mechanically simple and is a rather rugged electrical pickup. Its use in strain gauge
work has been limited because of the mechanical attachment problem. Its operation
can be severely affected by the presence of metal masses in the vicinity and by stray
magnetic fields.
These have been largely supplemented by the electrical strain gauge. They are
unique among all forms of strain gauges in view of their long-term stability and
freedom from drift over extended time periods.
The strain measuring system is based on the use of two identical gauges
identified as a test gauge and reference gauge. It has a common knife-edge mounting
provision. One knife-edge is fixed, mounted to the main body, while the second knife-
edge is mounted in a bearing suspension. One end of a steel wire is attached to the
movable knife-edge while the other end of the wire passes through a small hole in a
fixed knife-edge and is attached to a tension screw. The movable knife-edge is
connected to a second tension screw by a leaf spring. This design permits to adjust
the initial tension in the wire.The wire passes between the pole pieces of two small
electromagnets. One of the magnets is used to maintain the wire vibrating at its
natural frequency; other one is employed to pick up the frequency of the system.
Electrically both the magnets operate together in that the signal from the pick up
magnet is amplified and fed back into the driving magnet to keep the string excited in
its natural frequency.
The reference gage is identical to the test gage except that the knife-edges are
removed and a micrometer is used to tension the wire. A helical spring is employed in
series with the wire to permit larger rotation of the micrometer head for small changes
of stress in the wire. Test gage is mounted and adjusted along with reference gage.
Both gages are energized. The wires emit musical notes. If the frequency in two gages
is not the same, beats will occur. The micrometer setting is varied on the reference
gage until the beat frequency decreases to zero. The reading on the micrometer is then
taken and the strain is applied to the test gage. The change in tension in the wire of the
test gage produces a change in frequencies, and it is necessary to adjust the reference
gage until the beats are eliminated. The new micrometer reading is proportional to
the strain.
The sensitivity of this instrument is very high with possible determinations of
displacements of the order of 0.1and the gauge is temperature-sensitive unless the
thermal coefficients of expansion of the base and wire are closely matched over the
temperature range encountered during the test. The force required to drive the
transducer is relatively large ,and it should therefore not be employed in systems
where the large driving force will be detrimental.
23
employed optical strain gages is the Tuckerman model. It employs a three mirror
system. Its sensitivity is 2µin/in and the accuracy is quoted at 0.1% of full scale
deflections. The range varies from 0.0002 to 0.08. The applications of the optical
strain gages involve continuous lifetime health monitoring of bridges, dams,
buildings, tunnels, ships, aircraft, trains, and other complex structures, measurement
of strain on a structure’s surface and experimental mechanics evaluations requiring
many sensors.
4.5 Procedure
Find the weight and length of the rod and using the density value calculate
diameter of the bar. The deflections are measured using mechanical strain gauge. The
specimen has been fixed in the UTM by using proper grips. After fixing the specimen
in UTM the extensometer is fixed to the specimen. Load is applied at an interval of
0.5tons for 16mm diameter rod and 0.25tons for 10mm diameter rod. Extensometer
readings were noted down for every increment in load value until failure of the
specimen. Sometimes the starting time of yielding can be identified by jerks while
loading. The same process is repeated for all HYSD steel rods.
Find the weight and length of the rod and using the density value calculate
diameter of the bar. The rod is tested using UTM and strains are measured with a
mechanical strain gauge. The specimen is fixed in the UTM by using proper grips.
After fixing the specimen in UTM the extensometer is fixed to the specimen. Load is
applied at an interval of 0.1tons. Extensometer readings are noted down for every
increment of load value until failure of the specimen. The data is tabulated.
24
4.6 Observations and Calculations
Table 4.1 Test Data for 25mm dia High Tensile Steel Rod
25
Fig. 4.3 Stress-Strain Curve For 25 mm Rod
26
Table 4.2 Actual Diameter of Steel Rods
Extensometer
Load (ton) Load (N) Stress (MPa) Reading Extension Strain
0 0 0.00 734 0 0
0.1 981 31.67 778 44 0.00022
0.2 1962 63.33 780 46 0.00023
0.3 2943 95.00 794 60 0.0003
0.4 3924 126.66 814 80 0.0004
0.5 4905 158.33 842 108 0.00054
0.6 5886 189.99 862 128 0.00064
0.7 6867 221.66 890 156 0.00078
0.8 7848 253.32 912 178 0.00089
0.9 8829 284.99 938 204 0.00102
1 9810 316.66 957 223 0.001115
27
Fig. 4.5 Stress Strain Curve for 6mm dia MS Rod
Fig. 4.6 %Elongation Vs Gauge Length Curve for 6mm dia MS Rod
28
Table 4.5 Test Data for 12 mm dia HYSD rod
Extensometer
Load (ton) Load (N) Stress (Mpa) Reading Extension Strain
0 0 0.00 -569 0 0
0.2 1962 16.73 -544 25 0.000125
0.4 3924 33.46 -524 45 0.000225
0.6 5886 50.19 -514 55 0.000275
0.8 7848 66.92 -502 67 0.000335
1 9810 83.65 -488 81 0.000405
1.2 11772 100.38 -478 91 0.000455
1.4 13734 117.10 -464 105 0.000525
1.6 15696 133.83 -455 114 0.00057
1.8 17658 150.56 -444 125 0.000625
2 19620 167.29 -431 138 0.00069
2.2 21582 184.02 -415 154 0.00077
2.4 23544 200.75 -409 160 0.0008
2.6 25506 217.48 -395 174 0.00087
2.8 27468 234.21 -381 188 0.00094
3 29430 250.94 -374 195 0.000975
3.2 31392 267.67 -362 207 0.001035
3.4 33354 284.40 -354 215 0.001075
3.6 35316 301.13 -342 227 0.001135
3.8 37278 317.85 -330 239 0.001195
4 39240 334.58 -320 249 0.001245
4.2 41202 351.31 -308 261 0.001305
4.4 43164 368.04 -299 270 0.00135
4.6 45126 384.77 -290 279 0.001395
4.8 47088 401.50 -285 284 0.00142
5 49050 418.23 -277 292 0.00146
5.2 51012 434.96 -271 298 0.00149
5.4 52974 451.69 -252 317 0.001585
5.6 54936 468.42 -240 329 0.001645
5.8 56898 485.15 -231 338 0.00169
29
Table 4.6 Elongation Measurement for 12 mm dia HYSD Rod
Fig. 4.7 Stress Strain Curve for 12mm dia HYSD Rod
30
Fig. 4.8 %Elongation vs Gauge Length Curve for 12mm dia HYSD Rod
Extensometer
Load (ton) Load (N) Stress (Mpa) Reading Extension Strain
0 0 0.00 -374 0 0
0.5 4905 25.02 -344 30 0.00015
1 9810 50.03 -314 60 0.0003
1.5 14715 75.05 -302 72 0.00036
2 19620 100.07 -285 89 0.000445
2.5 24525 125.08 -275 99 0.000495
3 29430 150.10 -254 120 0.0006
3.5 34335 175.12 -241 133 0.000665
4 39240 200.13 -224 150 0.00075
4.5 44145 225.15 -209 165 0.000825
5 49050 250.17 -191 183 0.000915
5.5 53955 275.18 -174 200 0.001
6 58860 300.20 -164 210 0.00105
6.5 63765 325.22 -144 230 0.00115
7 68670 350.23 -121 253 0.001265
7.5 73575 375.25 -111 263 0.001315
8 78480 400.27 -90 284 0.00142
8.5 83385 425.28 -74 300 0.0015
9 88290 450.30 -58 316 0.00158
9.5 93195 475.31 -49 325 0.001625
31
Yield stress, fy =470.31MPa
Ultimate stress,fu =575.38MPa
40 53.72 34.3
60 78.2 30.333
80 100.62 25.775
100 124.18 24.18
Fig. 4.9 Stress Strain Curve for 16mm dia HYSD Rod
32
Fig. 4.10 %Elongation vs Gauge Length Curve for 16mm dia HYSD Rod
Stress Extensometer
Load (ton) Load (N) (Mpa) Reading Extension Strain
0 0 0.00 -604 0 0
1 9810 316.53 -580 24 0.00012
2 19620 633.07 -552 52 0.00026
3 29430 949.60 -535 69 0.00035
4 39240 1266.13 -512 92 0.00046
5 49050 1582.67 -488 116 0.00058
6 58860 1899.20 -465 139 0.0007
7 68670 2215.73 -444 160 0.0008
8 78480 2532.27 -422 182 0.00091
9 88290 2848.80 -393 211 0.00106
10 98100 3165.33 -375 229 0.00115
11 107910 3481.87 -351 253 0.00127
12 117720 3798.40 -328 276 0.00138
13 127530 4114.93 -318 286 0.00143
14 137340 4431.47 -285 319 0.0016
15 147150 4748.00 -269 335 0.00168
16 156960 5064.53 -238 366 0.00183
17 166770 5381.07 -199 405 0.00203
18 176580 5697.60 -144 460 0.0023
19 186390 6014.13 -84 520 0.0026
33
Yield stress, fy = 287.75MPa
Ultimate stress,fu = 352.03MPa
20 28.02 40.1
40 50.38 25.95
60 71.6 19.33
80 92.9 16.125
Fig. 4.11 Stress Strain Curve for 20mm dia HYSD Rod
34
Fig. 4.12 %Elongation vs Gauge Length Curve for 20mm dia HYSD Rod
Table 4.11 Percentage of Elongation from the Graph of %Elongation vs Gauge Length
6-MS 31.5 35
12-HYSD 61.2 18
16-HYSD 79.1 26
20-HYSD 100 13
4.7 Results
35
4.8 Inference
The modulus of elasticity calculated using electrical resistance gauge confirms closely
to the actual value 2 x105 MPa. This shows that the electrical resistance strain gauge is more
efficient than other gauges like acoustical gauge. The erroneous results for the HYSD bars
could be due to jerking of the fixity conditions of the testing machine. Percentage of
elongation is decreases when diameter of the bars increases.
36
EXPERIMENT 5
5.1 Objective
5.2 Apparatus
Dial gauge (3 nos.), DEMECH gauges, Microscope (to measure crack width),
Meter scale and Loading frame.
5.3 Theory
An ‘under-reinforced section’ is the one in which the area of tension steel is such that
as the ultimate limit state is approached, the yield strain in steel is reached before the
37
ultimate compressive strain is reached in the extreme fibre of concrete. On further
increasing the load, the strain in steel increases much faster than the strain in concrete.
As the stress in steel remains nearly constant, the neutral axis shifts upwards in order
to maintain equilibrium. So the strain in concrete increases slowly. Finally failure
occurs when concrete reaches its maximum strain limit. Therefore excessive
deflection and wider cracks are produced before failure. Under reinforced section is
always desirable as it gives sufficient warning before failure. Fig. 5.1 shows a typical
moment curvature relation for under reinforced beam.
Moment (M)
Secondary compression
failure
Mu
Mc First crack
Curvature (φ)
38
failure. The deflections will be less as the steel does not yield. The crack width is also
very small. The failure occurs suddenly without warning. Hence over reinforced
sections are avoided in practice. Fig. 5.2 shows a typical moment curvature relation
for over-reinforced beam
Moment (M)
Compression Failure
Mu
First crack
Mcr
Curvature (φ)
39
1
2 Test specimen
3
4 DEMEC Points
5
5.5 Calculations
40
= 4.22x 150x2003/12/(200/2)
Mcr = 4.22 kNm
Theoretical load corresponding to first crack= Mcr / a = 4.22/0.6
= 7.04 kN
Total load (2P) = 2 x 7.04
= 14.08 kN = 1.435 tonnes
41
= 35.95 kNm
Single load (P) = Mcr/a = 35.95/0.6 = 59.91kN
Total theoretical ultimate load (2P) = 59.91*2 = 119.83 kN
=12.214tonnes.
Experimental ultimate load (2P) = 12.7tonnes.
To calculate the curvature,
εcu
εst
5.6 Observations
5.6.1 Under Reinforced Section
Table 5.1 Dial Gauge Readings for Under Reinforced Section
42
Table 5.2 DEMEC Gauge Readings for Under Reinforced Section
Table 5.3 Strain and Curvature Values for Under Reinforced Section
43
Table 5.4 Load vs Crack Width for Under Reinforced Section
44
3500
3000
2500
2000
Load (kg)
1500
1000
500
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Fig. 5.5 Load vs Crack Width Curve for Under Reinforced Section
45
Fig. 5.7 Depth vs Strain Relationship for Under Reinforced Section
at Various Load
46
Table 5.6 DEMEC Gauge Readings for Over Reinforced Section
Table 5.7 Strain and Curvature Values for Over Reinforced Section
47
Table 5.8 Load vs Crack Width for Over Reinforced Section
5000 2 0.05
6000 3 0.075
7000 4 0.1
48
8000
7000
Load (kg)
6000
5000
4000
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Fig. 5.9 Load vs Crack Width Curve for Over Reinforced Section
49
Fig. 5.11 Depth vs Strain Relationship for Over Reinforced Section
at Various Loads
5.7 Results
For Under Reinforced Section
Total theoretical ultimate load = 3.67tonnes.
Experimental ultimate load = 5.1 tonnes.
50
Fig. 5.12 Crack Pattern in Under Reinforced Beam Section
51
Fig. 5.14 Under Reinforced Section at Failure
52
5.8 Conclusion
The tensile strain is more for under reinforced compare to over reinforced,
even though the ultimate load is less for under reinforced section. It shows that the
steel yielded before collapse condition. For Under Reinforced Beam Section, the
beam experienced excessive deflection before failure. The yielding of the steel occurs
before failure, but ultimate failure is caused by crushing of concrete in the
compressive zone. Thus under reinforced beam section failure is a ductile mode of
failure. From the experiment we conclude that failure of under reinforced concrete
beam gave ample warning before failure.
The failure of the Over Reinforced Concrete Beam is due to the crushing of
the concrete in the outer most compression fiber. Over reinforced concrete beam did
not give any warning before failure, as it is due to crushing of concrete while steel is
within elastic limit (gradual cracking is absent). As from Load vs Crack width graphs,
the rate of growth of crack (or crack width) is more for over reinforced section as load
increases.
Observed number of cracks in the under reinforced section was 11 and the
average crack spacing was 5.7 cm while in over reinforced section the average crack
spacing was 10.1 cm and only 5 cracks were formed. It is inferred that in the under
reinforced section, the number of cracks are more compared to over reinforced section
because of bond failure between steel and concrete due to yielding of steel rod. From
a study of strain–depth graph, we can conclude that the assumption ‘At any cross-
section, Plane Sections before bending remain Plane after bending’ is justified.
53
EXPERIMENT 6
6.1 Objective
To study the flexure behavior of rolled steel joist beam under four point
loading and to determine the modulus of elasticity.
6.2 Apparatus
6.3 Theory
εc
εt
B
M 1 2ε
= =φ =
EI R d
ε = strain in extreme fiber.
54
W W
5Wl 3
1. Deflection at 1/3 rd length, δ=
324 EI
23Wl 3
2. Deflection at middle of beam, δ =
1296 EI
Wl 2
θ=
3. Rotation at support, 9 EI
σy
τxy
σx θ σx
τyx
σy
Fig. 6.3 Stress Distribution along the Section
55
2. Maximum and Minimum Shear Stress
(σ −σ y )
2
τ max = + + τ xy 2
x
(σ −σ y )
2
τ min = − + τ xy 2
x
2
3. Direction of Principal Stress θP
tan (2θP) = 2τXy/(σY-σX)
5. Strain Rosettes
θ A = θ8 = 0o ,θ B = θ 7 = 45o , θC = θ 6 = 90o
ε A = ε x cos 2 θ A + ε y sin 2 θ A + γ xy cos θ A sin θ A
εx +εy
ε max =
1
(ε x − ε y )2 + γ xy 2
+
2 2
εx +εy 1
ε min = − (ε x − ε y )2 + γ xy 2
2 2
1 γ xy
θ= tan −1
2 ε −ε
x y
E
σ max = (ε max + νε min )
1 −ν 2
E
σ min = (ε min + νε max )
1 −ν 2
An ISMB200 joist is supported on two points which are L= 2.02 m apart. The
Support condition is achieved by providing rods as supports. Out of two rods one is
welded and the other is kept free, so that welded rod acts as hinged end and other acts
as roller ends.
This is a simply supported beam loaded at middle third points of the beam.
The load is applied by hydraulic jack. It is a push –pull hydraulic jack through which
a compressive force up to 2tonnes is applied. Totally 3 gauges are used. The
56
positions of the gauges are, one at mid-point, two at one third points of span. Eight
electrical resistance strain gauges are placed as shown in figure. The five strain
gauges are to find the strain distribution across the depth at the mid span section. 6, 7
and 8 strain gauges called strain rosettes are arranged as shown in figure. From these
rosette strains, principal stress at the point can be determined.
6.5 Procedure
57
6.6 Observation and Calculation
58
Table 6.2 Deflection Calculation
59
Table 6.4 Strain Calculation
Table 6.5 Stain Gauge Reading for Calculation of Principle Stresses and Strains
60
Table 6.6 Principle Stress Strain and Angle for Various Loadings
61
Fig. 6.5 Load vs Deflection Relationship at L/2
62
Table 6.7 Moment-Curvature Calculations
63
Fig. 6.8 Moment vs Curvature Plot
64
Fig. 6.10 Position of Strain and Dial Gauges
6.7 Inference
Strain compatibility graph shows that strain is varying linearly from N.A. and
attains maximum at top and bottom fibers. So plane section remains plane for small
stress. From load vs. deflection curve it is clear that the relationship is linear.
Experimental value of E obtained from moment-curvature graph is 1.185x105 N/mm2.
65
EXPERIMENT 7
7.1 Objective:
To study the buckling behavior of steel columns made up of single and double angle
sections.
7.2 Apparatus:
7.3 Theory:
π 2 EI 4π 2 EI n 2π 2 EI
Pe = , ,...........,
L2 L2 L2
where n is any integer.
While there are several buckling modes corresponding to n = 1, 2, 3,….., the lowest
stable buckling mode corresponds to n = 1.
66
The lowest value of the critical load (i.e.; the load causing buckling in single
curvature) is given by
π 2 EI
Pe =
L2
where, Pe = buckling strength of elastic column
E = modulus of elasticity
I = moment of inertia at the principal axis of the section at which the buckling
has taken place
l = effective length of the column
Pe π 2 E
σe = =
A L
r
2
( )
Column buckles at a certain load because the straight configuration becomes unstable
at that load. The load at which the straight configuration of column ceases is the load at
which neutral equilibrium is possible. This load is referred as critical load.
This is also known as Euler’s buckling load.
Critical ratio (l/r) is the ratio below, which the column fails due to yielding. It is
obtained as
π 2 EI
σy =
(L r )2
where σy = 250N/mm2
E = 2.0 x 105 N/mm2
So (l/r) ≥ 89
where r = radius of gyration
Buckling failure occur if l/r ≥ 89
A perfectly straight mild steel column buckles at the stress given by above equation
above for larger values of the l/r about the principal axis having the largest l/r and fails by
yielding at slenderness ratios lesser that 89. Note that even for perfect columns this will hold
good only for hot rolled sections.
In practice a loaded column may experience initial crookedness eccentricity of
loading residual stresses and lack of clearly defined yield point, strain-hardening effects etc.
Only strain hardening tends to raise the column strength values for all or part of the
slenderness ratio range.
The beneficial effect of strain hardening at low slenderness values is generally more
than adequate to provide compensation for any loss of strength due to small accidental
eccentricities in loading. Although the column strength can exceed the value obtained from
the yield strength for purposes of structural design, the column strength curve is generally
67
considered as having a cut off at yield strength to avoid large plastic compressive
deformation.
1 1 1
= +
σ an σ en σ yn
where σa = Actual strength of a real column, in N/mm2
σe = Euler’s buckling strength, in N/mm2
σy = Yield strength, in N/mm2
By varying the value of the constant power n, different curves can be obtained.
As per IS: 800 – 1984, n = 1.4.
Southwell’s plot is a data reduction technique, which could be used to determine the
isolated-mode buckling load for an imperfect column. This technique is based on the
assumption that the plot P-δ acts as rectangular hyperbola, with the load axis and the
horizontal line P = Pc as asymptotes, with P the measured load, and δ the deformation.
As par this technique, we will plot a graph between δ/P and δ. For any combination of
initial curvature and eccentricity in the application of load, the critical load can be obtained as
the inverse slope of the straight line.
Slender members will generally fail along their weak axis, along which member
comprises with least moment of inertia. We can classify the modes of failure as failure about
major axis, failure about minor axis and failure due to twisting of column.
7.6 Procedure:
The testing of the two individual specimens, one single angle and the other double
angle (back to back) was carried out as per the following steps.The dimensions of the
specimens were measured with the help of a vernier caliper. The dimensions were measured
at three different locations and the average was taken. The length of the specimens was
measured with the help of a scale. The columns were tested for hinged condition. The ideal
hinge condition is achieved by providing a hemispherical iron piece fitted in a grove at the
end plates of the columns. The vertical alignment of the test piece is checked with the help of
a plumb bob. At the mid height of the column two dial gauges are fixed at mutually
orthogonal directions to measure the deflection of the column, from its original position. The
load is then applied on the specimen with the help of hydraulic jack. The load is increased at
a uniform rate and corresponding deflections for each incremental load of100 kg (for single
angle) and 500 kg (for double angle) were noted with the help of the dial gauge. The load
increment is continued till the column failed in buckling. Out of plane deformation were
measured with the help of the dial gauges up to failure.
68
Screw Jack
Test Specimen
End Plates
Concrete Pedestal
Test Floor
69
7.7 Determination of Theoretical Failure Load:
7.7.1 Specimen - I: Single Angle Compression Member
20 mm
Length = 450.00 mm
End condition is hinged at both ends
3mm
Effective length = 450.00 mm
Radius of gyration = 3.7 m
Moment of inertia, Imin = 2000 mm4.
Pcr = π2EImin/le2 20 mm
=π 2×2×105×2000/4502 Fig. 7.2 Single angle (20x20x3)
= 19.495 kN
Pcr = 1989.3 kg.
1 1 1
= +
σ an σ en σ yn
σe = 174.063 N/mm2
σy = 250 N/mm2
n = 1.4
σa = 129.2924 N/mm2
Rankine’s critical load,
PR = 14.48 kN
PR = 1476 kg.
70
1 1 1
= +
σ an σ en σ yn
σe = 399.64 N/mm2
σy = 250 N/mm2
n= 1.4
σa = 185.5 N/mm2
PR = 41.552 kN
PR = 4235.68 kg.
7.8Observations:
7.8.1 Single angle under uniaxial compression
71
Fig 7.3. Load-Deflection Curve for Single Angle Strut
From graph (Fig2.4), by the line of best equation, the slope is found as 7142.85.
Failure load for the single angle strut is 7142.85kg.
72
7.8.2 Double Angle Buckling
Experimental Failure Load (for double angle) = 6540kg.
Table 7.2 Calculation for double angle strut
Load P in Dialgauge Reading Deflection in mm d/P
kg Face 1 Face 2 Face 1 Face 2 Face 1 Face 2
0 520 504 0 0 0 0
250 495 479 0.25 0.25 0.001 0.001
500 488 477 0.32 0.27 0.00064 0.00054
750 485 475 0.35 0.29 0.000467 0.000387
1000 480 471 0.4 0.33 0.0004 0.00033
1250 475 465 0.45 0.39 0.00036 0.000312
1500 468 449 0.52 0.55 0.000347 0.000367
1750 463 453 0.57 0.51 0.000326 0.000291
2000 456 446 0.64 0.58 0.00032 0.00029
2250 450 442 0.7 0.62 0.000311 0.000276
2500 444 436 0.76 0.68 0.000304 0.000272
2750 437 430 0.83 0.74 0.000302 0.000269
3000 431 423 0.89 0.81 0.000297 0.00027
3250 423 415 0.97 0.89 0.000298 0.000274
3500 411 406 1.09 0.98 0.000311 0.00028
3750 400 394 1.2 1.1 0.00032 0.000293
4000 390 384 1.3 1.2 0.000325 0.0003
4250 380 372 1.4 1.32 0.000329 0.000311
4500 370 360 1.5 1.44 0.000333 0.00032
4750 361 347 1.59 1.57 0.000335 0.000331
5000 351 323 1.69 1.81 0.000338 0.000362
5250 342 317 1.78 1.87 0.000339 0.000356
5500 331 300 1.89 2.04 0.000344 0.000371
5750 319 279 2.01 2.25 0.00035 0.000391
6000 309 260 2.11 2.44 0.000352 0.000407
6250 298 237 2.22 2.67 0.000355 0.000427
6500 281 206 2.39 2.98 0.000368 0.000458
6750 220 200 3 3.04 0.000444 0.00045
73
Fig. 7.5 Load-Deflection Curve for Double Angle Strut
From graph (Fig7.6), by the line of best equation, the slope (y=mx+c) is found as
m=6935. Failure load for the double angle strut is 6935kg.
74
7.9 Results:
7.10 Conclusions:
In practical conditions long columns (Single angle) fails much below theoretical
failure load. The column buckles about its Imin axis (VV axis for single angle section and YY
axis for the double angle section used). Practically it is difficult to achieve concentric loading
condition. The failure load of double angle section connected back to back will be much more
than the combined failure load of two individual single angle columns. From the results, it is
inferred that Rankine’s formula is giving conservative values.
Fig. 7.7 Buckled Double Angle Fig. 7.8 Buckled Single Angle
75
EXPERIMENT 8
8.1 Objective
To examine the behaviour of tied R.C column under axial compression load
and to estimate the ultimate load carrying capacity of the column.
8.2 Apparatus
8.3 Theory
Po = Cc +Cs
= fcc Ac + fscAsc
Po = fcc Ag + (fsc-fcc) Asc
Where,
Ag - Gross area of cross-section (Ac + Asc)
76
Asc - Area of longitudinal reinforcement
Ac - Net area of concrete in the section (Ag-Asc)
The theoretical failure load for RC column under uniaxial compression is given by
Pu =0.67fckAg + (fy-0.67fck)Asc
Where,
fck - Characteristic compressive strength of concrete
fy - Characteristic strength of compression reinforcement
8.4 Procedure
The overall dimensions of the column along with the reinforcement details are
given in Fig. 8.1 prior to the compression test on the column; the compressive
strength of concrete was found out by testing two numbers of cubes of same grade as
that of column specimen.Measure the dimensions of column.Estimate the theoretical
failure load.Fix the DEMEC points on each face of the column.Apply load on the
specimen at interval of 5 tones and measure strain corresponding to each interval of
loading on each face of the column.Finally, write down load corresponding to failure
of column. Compare the two results.
8.5 Calculations
77
P
200
1500
A A'
200
200
150
150
4 nos. 12 Φ
SECTION A-A'
78
8.6 Observations
8.7 Calculations
79
Fig. 8.2 Axial Stress vs Strain (Strain Face A)
80
Fig. 8.4 Axial Stress vs Strain (Strain Face C)
81
8.8 Results
8.9 Conclusions
The experimental ultimate axial load for the column was not matched with the
theoretical values. The experimental value is much lesser than theatrical values which
may be due to faults in loading setup of the equipment, platen restraint or due to non-
homogeneity of column end faces. The failure is not at the center. It is taken place at
0.34m above the center. It is inferred that it is the weak plane due to poor
compactness of the concrete. The failure taken place due to buckling of the
reinforcement bars between the stirrups.
82
EXPERIMENT 9
9.1 Objective
To find the bond strength of concrete and to study the bond stress-slip
response of concrete based on pull-out test as per IS: 2770-1967.
9.2 Apparatus
9.3 Theory
1. Flexural bond
2. Anchorage bond
The mechanisms that initiate bond failure may be any one or combination of the
following:
Break-up of adhesion between the bar and the concrete, Longitudinal splitting
of the concrete around the bar, Crushing of the concrete in front of the bar ribs (in
deformed bars) and Shearing of the concrete keyed between the ribs along a
cylindrical surface surrounding the ribs (in deformed bars).
The most common type of bond failure mechanism is the pulling of the
reinforcement bar, following the longitudinal splitting of the concrete along the bar
embedment. Occasionally failure occurs with the bar pulling out of the concrete,
leaving a circular hole without causing extensive pulling of the concrete. Such a
failure may occur with plain smooth bars placed with large cover, and with very small
diameter deformed bars (wires) having large concrete cover. For the specimen if the
83
cover to bar diameter is kept below 3, it may result in splitting type of failure. For
typical pull out test specimen the cover to bar diameter ratio is kept above 3. So that
splitting of concrete can be avoided. Also spiral reinforcements are provided around
the bar to avoid the splitting of concrete.
In the case of ribbed bars, the bearing pressure between the rib and the
concrete is inclined to the bar axis as shown in Fig. 9.1. This introduces radial forces
in the concrete ‘wedging action’ causing circumferential tensile stresses in the
concrete surrounding the bar and tending to split the concrete along the weakest plane.
The direction of the splitting depends on the relative values of the bottom cover, side
cover and bar spacing.
Radial stress
Reaction
Bond stress
Deformed bars are used instead of mile steel bars, smaller bar diameters are
used, higher grade of concrete is used, increased cover is provided around each bar,
increased length of embedment, bends and /or hooks are provided, Mechanical
anchorages are employed and any measure that will increase the confinement of the
concrete around the bar is employed.
The slip at the loaded end shall be calculated as the average of the readings of
the two dial gauges, corrected for the elongation of the reinforcing bar in the distance
between the bearing surface of concrete block and the point on the reinforcing bar at
which the measuring device was attached. A typical bond strength vs slip graph is
shown in Fig. 9.2.
84
τ
τf = bond strength due
(τ/τmax)=(S/Smax)α to friction only
τmax where α = 0.4
τf
S3 (rib spacing)
Smax S2
(S1) Slip in mm
9.4 Procedure
The yield point of the reinforcing bars has been reached, the enclosing
concrete has failed (the type of failure should be noted) and A minimum slippage of
2.5 mm has occurred at the loaded end.
The crushing strength of the concrete cube at an age corresponding to the age
of the specimen at the time of making the pull-out tests, The age of specimen, The
load at a slip of 0.025 mm at the free end, The load at a slip of 0.25 mm at the free
end, The slips at free and loaded ends at regular intervals of loading and The
maximum load at failure and the type of failure.
85
Actuator
Reinforcing rod
Rod
Cube
Dial gauge 3
Cube
Confining reinforcement to
avoid splitting of concrete
86
9.5 Calculations
Failure
Size Area Compressive
Specimen Load
(mm) (mm2) Strength (N/mm2)
(tonnes)
Table 9.2 Observation Load and Slip for Mild Steel Bar
Loaded Avg.
Free
End Free Loaded End Loaded Bond
Load End
Reading End Slip (mm) End Stress
(kg) Slip
Slip (N/mm2)
(mm)
1 2 3 1 2 (mm)
0 510 529 3326 0 0 0 0 0
-
200 512 518 3326 0.02 0.11 0.045 0 0.20828
400 509 508 3326 0.01 0.21 0.11 0 0.41656
600 505 496 3326 0.05 0.33 0.19 0 0.62484
800 500 483 3326 0.1 0.46 0.28 0 0.83312
1000 498 470 3310 0.12 0.59 0.355 0.16 1.04140
1200 Slipping started
87
Table 9.3 Observation Load and slip for HYSD Bar
88
9.5.1 Mild Steel Bar
The Bond stress at the loaded end @ slip 0.25 mm is 0.765 Mpa.
The Bond stress at the free end @ slip 0.025 mm is 0.5145 Mpa
89
9.5.2 HYSD Bar
The Bond stress at the loaded end @ slip 0.25 mm is 2.8349 Mpa.
The Bond stress at the loaded end @ slip 0.025 mm is 3.9703 Mpa.
90
9.6 Results
9.7 Conclusion
The type of failure occurred for both plain and deformed bar is splitting type
of failure (Longitudinal splitting of cube). As the specimens have spiral
reinforcement, there was proper confinement and thus, there was considerable
resistance to the propagation of continuous longitudinal splitting cracks. As expected,
the bond stress in deformed bar is more than that of mild steel bar. This is because of
the action of mechanical interlock due to the surface protrusions in deformed bar in
addition to the chemical adhesion and frictional resistance in mile steel bars. Ratio of
Ultimate bond stress to the bond stress corresponding Code Specifications is higher
for deformed bar than for mild steel bar.
91
EXPERIMENT 10
10.1 Objective:
To study the behavior of R.C beam under Torsion and to estimate the ultimate
torsional carrying capacity of the beam.
10.2 Apparatus:
Load cell, Dial Gauge (L.C 0.01mm), Support to allow free rotation of the
beam at the support, Setup for applying torsion (Jack and lever arm).
10.3 Theory:
Equilibrium torsion occurs in beam where external loads resist only by torsion.
Equilibrium torsion occurs mainly due to eccentricity of the loading and does not
depend on the stiffness of the member. Equilibrium Torsion must be necessarily
considered in the design. The member has to be designed for the full torsion which is
transmitted by the member to the supports. Moreover the end of the member should
be suitably restrained to enable the member to resist effectively the torsion induced.
Equilibrium torsion will occur in beams supporting lateral overhanging projection and
curved beams.
Compatibility torsion occurs in members where the continuity requirements
have to be met. It is due to the flexural action of the secondary beam. In this the
torsion strength depends on the stiffness of the member.
The torsional capacity of the plain concrete member depends on the cracking
moment capacity of the member and failure in torsion is caused by the torsional
cracking due to diagonal tensile stresses. Therefore reinforcement has to be provided
in the form of spirals or stirrups along the length of the member in addition to the
longitudinal reinforcement. The torque vs twist behavior of torsional reinforced
concrete member is similar to that of plain concrete beam until the formation of first
crack. Corresponding cracking torque is Tcr.
Torsional stiffness of concrete decreases after the cracking which implies that
angle of twist increases now strength and the behavior depends on the reinforcement
92
present in the beam which increases the torsional stiffness by between zero and 10
percent. For very small amount of torsional reinforcement no increase in torsional
strength beyond Tcr and failure occurs soon after the first crack. If more steel is
provided Tcr will increase only up to the yielding of the steel and beyond this any
increase in steel will not have any effect on Tcr and the member fails by crushing of
concrete.
10.5 Procedure:
The dimensions of the beam are measured. Grid lines are drawn to know the
crack pattern of the member. Two dial gages are fixed on each end of the beam using
which the rotation of the member can be found out by knowing deflection. The RC
beam is subjected to pure torsion with the aid of support. Load is applied
perpendicular to the axis of the beam at load interval of 50 kg, the deflection
corresponding to each interval of loading for all the dial gauge deflection is taken
Load corresponding to cracking torsion of the beam was noted. Load corresponding to
ultimate torsion of the beam was noted. Compare the values with theoretical values
BEAM
SPECIMEN
DIAL
GAUGE
LOAD
CELL
L - Lever arm = 1m
Length of the beam = 196.5 cm
93
10.6.1 Cube strength calculation
A f Al f yl
Tur = 2b1d1 t yt
sv 2(b1 + d1 )
At = Area of cross section of one leg stirrup
Al = Area of cross section of Longitudinal bar
b1 = Length of short leg stirrup
d1 = Length of Long leg stirrup
94
Table 10.1: Experimental Observation on Torque vs. rotation
95
10.7 Comment:
The curve is linear depicting the classical pure Torsion theory of Strength of
materials.
10.8 Result:
The cracks developed all around the section and severe cracking is observed
on the mid faces of sides of the rectangular section (In acceptance with the Strength of
materials solution). It is also observed that beam resists only small amount of load
(torsion) beyond the development of first crack (at 2.9 kN-m), after cracking of
concrete showing that the failure (at 3.8 kN-m) of a beam in torsion is a brittle mode
of failure. The number of cracks formed is 5 with average crack spacing of 25cm.
96
EXPERIMENT 11
11.1 Objective:
To study the behavior of reinforced concrete beam with and without shear
reinforcement.
11.2 Apparatus:
Steel Scale, Dial Gauge (Least count = 0.01mm), Loading frame (Capacity =
20tonnes).
11.3 Theory:
The ultimate Limit State in flexural shear means shear associated with a
varying bending moment. Commonly, flexural shear is simply referred to as shear. In
the case of slabs, this type of shear is sometimes referred to as one-way shear and is
distinct from two-way shear (punching shear), which is associated with the possibility
of punching through a relatively thin slab by a concentrated column load. Another
type of shear that needs consideration is torsional shear (due to torsion), which occurs,
generally in combination with flexural shear.
In beams, flexure and shear combine to create a bi-axial state of stress. This
causes principal stresses. The principal stresses generated are compressive and tensile
in nature. In the case of RC beams cracks are formed when the principal stress
exceeds the tensile strength of concrete.
In the region of bending, cracks appear perpendicular to the axis of the
member (vertical cracks). In the region of high shear force, the principal stresses are
generated at approximately 45o to the axis of the member. This leads to diagonal
cracking.
There are several mechanisms by which shear are transmitted between two
adjacent planes in a reinforced concrete beam. The transverse (external) shear force is
denoted as V (and has a maximum value near support, equal to the support reaction).
It is resisted by various mechanisms, the major ones being:
97
C
Vcz
Vs
Va
T
Vd
The interface shear Va is a tangential force transmitted along the inclined plane
of the crack, resulting from the friction against relative slip between the interlocking
surface of the crack. Its contribution can be significant, if the crack-width is limited.
The equilibrium of vertical forces in above figure results in the relation:
V = Vcz + Vay + Vd + Vs
98
Vay, decreases (instead of increasing), thereby forcing Vcz and Vd to increase at a
faster rate until either a splitting (dowel) failure occurs or the concrete in the
compression zone gets crushed under the combined effects of flexural compressive
stress and shear stress.
Owing to the pronounced yielding of the shear reinforcement, the failure of
the shear-reinforced beams is gradual and ductile in nature unlike beams without
shear reinforcement, whose failure in shear is sudden and brittle in nature. However,
if excessive shear reinforcement is provided, it is likely that the ‘Shear-Compression’
mode of failure will occur first, and this is undesirable, as such failure will occur
suddenly, without warning.
The magnitude of the design shear strength τc depends on various factors that
100 Ast
are related to the grade of concrete (fck) and the percentage tension steel, pt = .
bd
The value of τc given below
τc =
0.85 0.8 f ck ( )
(1 + 5β ) − 1
6β
where,
0.8 f ck
β= or 1 whichever is greater
6.89 pt
Shear strength Vc = τc × bd
Shear Strength V = Vc + Vs
where,
Vc = Shear Strength resisted by concrete
Vs = Shear Strength resisted by stirrups (Shear Reinforcement)
0.87 f y Asv d
Vs =
sv
99
TEST
SPECIMEN
SIMPLY
SUPPORTED
END
DIAL GAUGES
PLATFORM
11.4 Procedure:
The experimental setup is as shown in Fig 9.2. The load is applied in the
interval of 500 kg for without shear reinforcement span. Deflections are measured
with the help of dial the centre gauges at and under load point. The results are shown
in tabulated form. For shear reinforced span, the load increment in the range of
1000kg.
Width, b = 150 mm
Overall depth, D = 200 mm
Clear cover, d’ = 20 mm
Effective depth, d = (200-20-16/2-6)
= 166 mm
3 × 16 2 × π
Ast = = 603.19 mm2
4
pt = ( Ast / bd ) x 100
100
Shear strength of the concrete, V c = τc b d
= 0.9615x150x166
= 23.94 kN
Shear strength provided by Stirrups,
d
Vus = f y Asv
sv
= 250 x 0.7854 x 2 x 62 x166/90
= 26.075kN
Therefore shear strength of the beam without stirrups = Vc = 23.94 kN
Therefore shear strength of the beam with stirrups = Vc + Vs= 23.94 + 26.075
= 50.015 kN
Dial gauge
Load (tonne) Load (kN) reading Deflection (mm)
0 0 879 0
0.5 4.905 890 0.11
1 9.81 901 0.22
1.5 14.715 912 0.33
2 19.62 924 0.45
2.5 24.525 934 0.55
3 29.43 944 0.65
3.5 34.335 954 0.75
4 39.24 963 0.84
4.5 44.145 975 0.96
5 49.05 989 1.1
6 58.86 1014 1.35
7 68.67 1036 1.57
8 78.48 1062 1.83
9 88.29 1096 2.17
10 98.1 Ultimate Load at collapse
101
Table 11.2: Load-Deflection variation in RC Beam with Shear Reinforcement
Fig. 11.3. Loads Vs Deflection in R.C. Beams With and Without Shear
Reinforcement
102
11.6 Result
Experimental Values:
Shear Strength of beam without shear reinforcement = 98.1 kN
Shear Strength of beam with shear reinforcement = 137.3 kN
Theoretical Values:
Shear Strength of beam without shear reinforcement = 23.94 kN
Shear Strength of beam with shear reinforcement = 50.01 kN
Fig. 11.4. Failure pattern for R.C.C beam without stirrups due to shear
11.7 Conclusion
It is observed from the test that crack formed in both the beams approximately
at 45o as per theoretical assumptions. The crack started at a distance of effective depth
from the face of the support. In the theoretical shear strength values (τc - taken from
IS 456-2000), partial safety factors are included. Hence we are getting higher
experimental values than theoretical values. Number of cracks formed in the beam
without shear reinforcement is 5, while that formed in the beam with shear
reinforcement is 9. But crack widths are larger in beam without shear reinforcement
scompared to with shear reinforcement.
103
EXPERIMENT 12
12.1 Objective
To study the behavior of square plate loaded at the center under different
support conditions like simply supported on edges (corners free), simply supported on
edges (corners restrained), simply supported on corners (corners free), simply
supported on corners (corners restrained)
12.2 Apparatus
12.3 Theory
Plates are straight, plane (flat, no curved) surface structures whose thickness is
slight compared to their other dimensions. Geometrically, they are bound either by
straight or curved lines. Statically plates have free simply supported and fixed
boundary conditions including elastic supports and elastic restraints, or in some cases
point supports. The static or dynamic loads carried by plates are predominantly
perpendicular to the plate surface.
Basic assumptions for small deflection plate theory are as follows. The
material of the plate is elastic, homogeneous and isotropic. The plate is initially flat.
The thickness of the plate is small compared to its other dimensions. The smallest
lateral dimension of the plate is at least ten times larger than its thickness. The
deflections are small compared to the plate thickness. A maximum deflection from
one tenth to one fifth of the thickness is considered as the limit for small deflection
theory. The deflection of the plate is produced by displacement of points of the
middle surface normal to the initial plane.
A wire strain gauge can effectively measure strain in only one direction. To
determine the three independent components of plane strain, three linearly
independent strain measures are needed, i.e., three strain gages positioned in a rosette-
like layout.
Consider a strain rosette attached on
the surface with an angle a from the x-axis.
The rosette itself contains three strain gages
with the internal angles b and g, as
illustrated on the right.
Suppose that the strain measured
from these three strain gages are εa, εb, and
εc, respectively.
The following coordinate
transformation equation is used to convert
104
the longitudinal strain from each strain gage into strain expressed in the x-y
coordinates,
Applying this equation to each of the three strain gages results in the following
system of equations,
These equations are then used to solve for the three unknowns, εx, εy, and εxy.
12.4 Procedure
The dimensions of the plate were measured. The plate was gradually loaded in
steps of 2kg up to 10kg and then unloaded in the same sequence. The strain and
deflection measurements were taken during loading and unloading. The test was
repeated for all the four boundary conditions.
105
D3 D2 D1
D5 D4
6
300
4 5
2 1
150
300
10
150
150
All dimensions in mm
W
106
12.5 Observations
Table 12.1 Dial Gauge Readings - Case1 - Plate Simply Supported On Edges (Corners Free)
Load Dial Gauge (1) Dial Gauge (2) Dial Gauge (3) Dial Gauge(4) Dial Gauge(5)
kg N L UL Avg. L UL Avg. L UL Avg. L UL Avg. L UL Avg.
0 0 322 315 318.5 300 295 297.5 849 844 846.5 230 224 227 480 471 475.5
2 19.6 259 248 253.5 254 246 250 816 807 811.5 170 157 163.5 408 390 399
4 39.2 217 212 214.5 220 215 217.5 787 783 785 117 112 114.5 342 335 338.5
6 58.9 197 192 194.5 200 196 198 777 773 775 96 92 94 308 302 305
8 78.5 178 175 176.5 182 179 180.5 767 767 767 76 74 75 272 270 271
10 98.1 159 159 159 164 164 164 756 756 756 57 57 57 240 240 240
Table 12.2 Dial Gauge Readings - Case2 - Plate Simply Supported On Edges (Corners Restrained)
Load Dial Gauge (1) Dial Gauge (2) Dial Gauge (3) Dial Gauge(4) Dial Gauge(5)
kg N L UL Avg. L UL Avg. L UL Avg. L UL Avg. L UL Avg.
0 0 299 289 294 283 289 286 822 818 820 187 179 183 452 435 443.5
2 19.6 248 238 243 245 238 241.5 797 793 795 141 135 138 385 370 377.5
4 39.2 219 212 215.5 222 212 217 785 781 783 118 113 115.5 345 332 338.5
6 58.9 198 194 196 204 194 199 775 771 773 98 94 96 310 298 304
8 78.5 179 176 177.5 185 176 180.5 764 762 763 79 76 77.5 275 265 270
10 98.1 161 161 161 169 169 169 755 755 755 62 62 62 241 241 241
107
Table 12.3 Dial Gauge Readings - Case3 - Plate Simply Supported On Corners (Corners Free)
Load Dial Gauge (1) Dial Gauge (2) Dial Gauge (3) Dial Gauge(4) Dial Gauge(5)
kg N L UL Avg. L UL Avg. L UL Avg. L UL Avg. L UL Avg.
0 0 389 378 383.5 303 301 302 548 537 542.5 398 389 393.5 735 727 731
2 19.6 316 300 308 225 219 222 476 467 471.5 320 307 313.5 631 608 619.5
4 39.2 241 225 233 147 142 144.5 412 401 406.5 244 229 236.5 535 510 522.5
6 58.9 166 153 159.5 65 64 64.5 350 335 342.5 141 154 147.5 435 418 426.5
8 78.5 93 83 88 1 1 1 290 277 283.5 91 83 87 342 331 336.5
10 98.1 23 23 23 1 1 1 231 231 231 22 22 22 260 260 260
Table 12.4 Dial Gauge Readings - Case4 - Plate Simply Supported On Corners (Corners Restrained)
Load Dial Gauge (1) Dial Gauge (2) Dial Gauge (3) Dial Gauge(4) Dial Gauge(5)
kg N L UL Avg. L UL Avg. L UL Avg. L UL Avg. L UL Avg.
0 0 374 360 367 313 298 305.5 552 538 545 401 386 393.5 714 641 677.5
2 19.62 325 302 313.5 260 239 249.5 508 487 497.5 349 326 337.5 642 575 608.5
4 39.24 267 245 256 299 179 239 440 538 489 291 268 279.5 562 525 543.5
6 58.86 205 184 194.5 238 115 176.5 408 386 397 231 209 220 480 432 456
8 78.48 142 129 135.5 70 58 64 354 343 348.5 170 158 164 400 372 386
10 98.1 79 79 79 8 8 8 300 306 303 114 114 114 320 320 320
L= Loading UL= Unloading Avg. =Average
108
Table 12.5 Deflection for Case-1 Plate Simply Supported on Edges
(Corners Free)
kg N 1 2 3 4 5
0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0
kg N 1 2 3 4 5
0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0
109
Table 12.7 Deflection for Case-3 Plate Simply Supported on Corners
(Corners Free)
Kg N 1 2 3 4 5
0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0
kg N 1 2 3 4 5
0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0
110
Fig. 12.2 Load Vs Deflection for Case-1
(Supported On Edges & Corners Free)
111
Fig. 12.4 Load Vs Deflection for Case3
(Supported On Corners & Corners Free)
112
Fig. 12.6 Comparison between Different Cases at Dial Gauge 1
113
Fig. 12.8 Comparison between Different Cases at Dial Gauge 3
114
Fig. 12.10 Comparison between Different Cases at Dial Gauge 5
115
Table 12.9 Top Strain gauge readings - Case1 - Plate Simply Supported on Edges (Corners Free)
Top Strain Gage Reading
Loa
d in Strain 1 Strain 2 Strain 3 Strain 4 Strain 5 Strain 6
kg Loadin Unloadin Loadin Unloadin Unloadin Unloadin Loadin Unloadin Loadin Unloadin
Loading Loading
g g g g g g g g g g
0 20.1 9.6 36.1 32.9 13.4 21.3 318.8 327.6 27.8 15.8 36.3 32.8
2 -71..5 -93.5 -50.0 -55.2 -53.5 -52.6 117.1 108.3 -49.1 -64.1 35.5 37.7
4 -158.0 -164.0 -50.3 -48.1 -82.2 -81.0 -66.0 -60.0 -129.0 -142.5 40.5 35.5
6 -204.4 -210.5 -11.3 -4.0 -109.6 -111.6 -160.0 -153.7 -217.8 -225.5 6.6 4.5
8 -244.3 -245.1 36.3 41.3 -138.4 -130.1 -239.0 -234.5 -239.3 -297.8 -25 -23.6
10 -281.9 -281.9 82.3 82.3 -169 -169 -310.7 -310.7 365.8 365.8 -51.6 -51.6
Table 12.10 Top face Strains- Case1 - Plate Simply Supported on Edges (Corners Free)
Top Strain Gage Reading
Strain 1 Strain 2 Strain 3 Strain 4 Strain 5 Strain 6
Load Strain 1 Strain 2 Strain 3 Strain 4 Strain 5 Strain 6
-4 -4 -4 -4 -4
kg Average *10 Average *10 Average *10 Average *10 Average *10 Average *10-4
0 14.850 0.000 34.500 0.000 17.350 0.000 323.200 0.000 21.800 0.000 34.550 0.000
2 -82.500 0.974 -52.600 0.871 -53.050 0.704 112.700 2.195 -56.600 0.784 36.600 -0.021
4 -161.000 1.759 -49.200 0.837 -81.600 0.990 -63.000 3.952 -135.750 1.576 38.000 -0.035
6 -207.450 2.223 -7.650 0.422 -110.600 1.280 -156.850 4.891 -221.650 2.435 5.550 0.290
8 -244.700 2.596 38.800 -0.043 -134.250 1.516 -236.750 5.690 -268.550 2.904 -24.300 0.589
10 -281.900 2.968 82.300 -0.478 -169.000 1.864 -310.700 6.429 365.800 -3.440 -51.600 0.862
116
Table 12.11 Principal plane Angle - Case1 - Plate Simply Supported on Edges (Corners Free)
1st Rosette (Strain Gauges 1,2&3) 2nd Rosette (Strain Gauges 4,5&6)
Load
kg εx *10-4 εy *10-4 εxy *10-4 Angle εx *10-4 εy *10-4 εxy *10-4 Angle
0 0.000 0.000 0.000 90.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 90.000
2 0.974 0.704 0.032 6.733 2.195 -0.021 -0.303 -7.659
4 1.759 0.990 -0.537 -27.212 3.952 -0.035 -0.383 -5.445
6 2.223 1.280 -1.330 -35.251 4.891 0.290 -0.156 -1.938
8 2.596 1.516 -2.099 -37.808 5.690 0.589 -0.236 -2.639
10 2.968 1.864 -2.894 -39.620 6.429 0.862 -7.085 -34.293
Table 12.12 Top Strain gauge readings – Case2 - Plate Simply Supported on Edges (Corners Restrained)
Top Strain Gage Reading
Load
Strain 1 Strain 2 Strain 3 Strain 4 Strain 5 Strain 6
kg
Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading
0 27.3 16.4 31.0 25.4 9.4 23.3 282.2 271.2 48.7 54.5 82.1 107.0
2 -58.2 -70.4 -24.7 -29.2 -45.1 -32.4 116.6 107.0 -28.7 -34.2 74.0 68.64
4 -125.0 -128.5 -12.5 -4.9 -62.5 -61.2 15.7 15.0 -116.9 -119.4 44.8 53.0
6 -169.4 -117.9 34.9 38.2 -89.0 -94.1 -70 -75.2 -190.7 -200.9 23.3 22.5
8 -211.3 -211.6 77.1 81.5 -119.4 -124.1 -148.3 -159.2 -265.1 -272.2 -5.3 -3.5
10 -254.3 -254.3 119.8 119.8 153.3 153.3 -224.9 -224.9 -332.9 -332.9 -27.1 -27.1
117
Table 12.13 Top face Strains- Case2 - Plate Simply Supported on Edges (Corners Restrained)
Table 12.14 Principal plane Angle – Case2 - Plate Simply Supported on Edges (Corners Restrained)
1st rosette (strain gauges 1,2&3) 2nd rosette (strain gauges 4,5&6)
Load
kg εx *10-4 εy *10-4 εxy *10-4 Angle εx *10-4 εy *10-4 εxy *10-4 Angle
0 0.000 0.000 0.000 90.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 90.000
2 0.862 0.551 -0.155 -22.465 1.649 0.232 -0.110 -4.422
4 1.486 0.782 -0.765 -32.662 2.614 0.457 0.163 4.286
6 1.655 1.079 -1.451 -39.405 3.493 0.717 0.369 7.451
8 2.333 1.381 -2.368 -39.337 4.305 0.990 0.556 9.269
10 2.762 -1.370 -1.612 -18.995 5.016 1.217 0.729 10.499
118
Table 12.15 Top Strain gauge readings – Case3 - Plate Simply Supported on Corners (Corners Free)
Top Strain Gage Reading
Load
Strain 1 Strain 2 Strain 3 Strain 4 Strain 5 Strain 6
kg
Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading
0 48..5 47.7 33.4 41.10 23.5 24.8 387.5 386.1 19.1 10.4 56.7 54.2
2 -38.5 -47.1 -42.5 -32.9 -72.9 -71.9 192.5 196.3 -98.3 -105.7 5.0 14.2
4 -121.1 -124.4 -116.4 -99.4 -161.7 -164.1 8.1 14.4 -205.2 -20.4 -32.1 -24.2
6 -205.4 -210.5 -181.1 -172.5 -252.5 -250.0 -175.6 -172.0 -307.6 -317.8 -61.3 -57.1
8 -236.0 -237.9 -243.9 -231.6 -331.0 -342.6 -350.1 -345.6 -401.1 -411.5 -83.9 -81.0
10 -361.2 -361.2 -280.1 -280.1 -415.3 -415.3 -509.3 -509.3 -492.1 -492.1 -100.6 -100.6
Table 12.16 Top face Strains- Case3 - Plate Simply Supported on Corners (Corners Free)
Top Strain Gage Reading
Strain 1 Strain 2 Strain 3 Strain 4 Strain 5 Strain 6
Load Strain 1 Strain 2 Strain 3 Strain 4 Strain 5 Strain 6
-4 -4 -4 -4
kg Average *10 Average *10 Average *10 Average *10 Average *10-4 Average *10-4
0 48.100 0.000 37.250 0.000 24.150 0.000 386.800 0.000 14.750 0.000 55.450 0.000
2 -42.800 0.909 -37.700 0.750 -72.400 0.966 194.400 1.900 -102.000 1.200 9.600 0.459
4 -122.750 1.709 -107.900 1.500 -162.900 1.871 11.250 3.800 -112.800 1.300 -28.150 0.836
6 -207.950 2.561 -176.800 2.100 -251.250 2.754 -173.800 5.600 -312.700 3.300 -59.200 1.147
8 -236.950 2.851 -237.750 2.800 -336.800 3.610 -347.850 7.300 -406.300 4.200 -82.450 1.379
10 -361.200 4.093 -280.100 3.200 -415.300 4.395 -509.300 9.000 -492.100 5.100 -100.600 1.561
119
Table 12.17 Principal plane Angle – Case3 - Plate Simply Supported on Corners (Corners free)
Load 1st Rosette (Strain Gauges 1,2&3) 2nd Rosette (Strain Gauges 4,5&6)
-4
kg εx*10 εy*10-4 εxy*10-4 Angle εx*10-4 εy*10-4 εxy*10-4 Angle
0 0.000 0.000 0.000 90.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 90.000
2 0.862 0.551 -0.155 -22.465 1.649 0.232 -0.110 -4.422
4 1.486 0.782 -0.765 -32.662 2.614 0.457 0.163 4.286
6 1.655 1.079 -1.451 -39.405 3.493 0.717 0.369 7.451
8 2.333 1.381 -2.368 -39.337 4.305 0.990 0.556 9.269
10 2.762 -1.370 -1.612 -18.995 5.016 1.217 0.729 10.499
Table 12.18 Top Strain gauge readings – Case4 - Plate Simply Supported on Corners (Corners restrained)
120
Table 12.19 Top face Strains- Case4 - Plate Simply Supported on Corners (Corners restrained)
Top Strain Gage Reading
Strain 1 Strain 2 Strain 3 Strain 4 Strain 5 Strain 6
Load Strain1 Strain2 Strain3 Strain4 Strain5 Strain6
-4 -4 -4 -4
kg Average *10 Average *10 Average *10 Average *10 Average *10-4 Average *10-4
0 -15.5 0.000 -14.3 0.000 26.8 0.000 400.1 0.000 49.3 0.000 66.7 0.000
2 -52.35 0.369 -21.6 0.073 -45.95 0.728 235.75 1.600 -36.65 0.860 54.8 0.119
4 -120.6 1.051 -92.1 0.780 -126.35 1.532 76.35 3.200 -120.85 1.700 28.95 0.378
6 -182.2 1.667 -138.95 1.200 -212.05 2.389 -91.3 4.900 -211.35 2.600 7.7 0.590
8 -255.2 2.397 -132.2 1.200 -283.9 3.107 -244.7 6.400 -293.3 3.400 1.5 0.652
10 -318.5 3.030 -208.3 1.900 -339.6 3.664 -387.6 7.900 -360.6 4.100 -1.2 0.679
Table 12.20 Principal plane Angle – Case4 - Plate Simply Supported on Corners (Corners restrained)
Load 1st Rosette (Strain Gauges 1,2&3) 2nd Rosette (Strain Gauges 4,5&6)
kg εx*10-4 εy*10-4 εxy*10-4 Angle εx*10-4 εy*10-4 εxy*10-4 Angle
0 0 0 0 90 0 0 0 90
2 0.369 0.728 -0.475 34.667 1.644 0.119 -0.022 -0.818
4 1.051 1.532 -0.513 32.474 3.238 0.378 -0.106 -2.121
6 1.667 2.389 -0.781 32.624 4.914 0.590 -0.146 -1.926
8 2.397 3.107 -1.573 38.661 6.448 0.652 -0.124 -1.226
10 3.030 3.664 -1.407 38.671 7.877 0.679 -0.179 -1.424
121
Fig. 12.11 Plot of Load Vs. Strain Curve for Strain Gage -1 Under Different
Boundary Conditions (For Top side)
Fig. 12.12 Plot of Load Vs. Strain Curve for Strain Gage -2 Under Different
Boundary Conditions (For Top side)
122
Fig. 12.13 Plot of Load Vs. Strain Curve for Strain Gage-3 Under Different
Boundary Conditions (For Top side)
Fig. 12.14 Plot of Load Vs. Strain Curve for Strain Gage-4 Under Different
Boundary Conditions (For Top side)
123
Fig. 12.15 Plot of Load Vs. Strain Curve for Strain Gage-5 Under Different
Boundary Conditions (For Top side)
Fig. 12.16 Plot of Load Vs. Strain Curve for Strain Gage-6 Under Different
Boundary Conditions (For Top side)
124
Fig. 12.17 Principal plane angle Vs Load relationship for case-1 Plate Simply
Supported on Edges (Corners free) (For Top side)
Fig. 12.18 Principal plane angle Vs Load relationship for case-2 Plate Simply
Supported on Edges (Corners restrained) (For Top side)
125
Fig. 12.19 Principal plane angle Vs Load relationship for case-3 Plate Simply
Supported on Corners (Corners free) (For Top side)
Fig. 12.20 Principal plane angle Vs Load relationship for case-4 Plate Simply
Supported on Corners (Corners restrained) (For Top side)
126
Table 12.21 Bottom Strain gauge readings - Case1 - Plate Simply Supported on Edges (Corners free)
Bottom Strain Gage Reading
Load
Strain 1 Strain 2 Strain 3 Strain 4 Strain 5 Strain 6
kg
Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading
0 43.7 37.4 42.9 37.8 25.6 16.0 59.5 49.1 29.2 19.1 23.3 22.8
2 149.6 132.5 144.2 130.7 83.3 72.1 276.5 240.6 130.5 117.4 30.5 34.0
4 220.0 211.2 154.4 150.5 117.3 104.2 437.9 424.6 235.6 216.6 46.2 36.4
6 254.1 244.3 125.3 121.7 150.2 137.3 529.7 521.6 349.3 335.5 91.4 81.0
8 277.1 275.5 95.7 94.6 180.3 173.7 603.4 599.4 449.1 437.6 132.8 127.1
10 304.2 304.2 70.9 70.9 208.9 208.9 673.8 673.8 -544.9 -544.9 176.2 176.2
Table 12.22 Bottom face Strains- Case1 - Plate Simply Supported on Edges (Corners free)
Bottom Strain Gage Reading
Strain 1 Strain 2 Strain 3 Strain 4 Strain 5 Strain 6
Load Strain1 Strain2 Strain3 Strain4 Strain5 Strain6
in kg Average *10-4 Average *10-4 Average *10-4 Average *10-4 Average *10-4 Average *10-4
0 40.55 0.000 40.35 0.000 20.8 0.000 54.3 0.000 24.15 0.000 23.05 0.000
2 141.05 -1.010 137.45 -1.000 77.7 -0.569 258.55 -2.000 123.95 -1.000 32.25 -0.092
4 215.6 -1.750 152.45 -1.000 110.75 -0.900 431.25 -4.000 226.1 -2.000 41.3 -0.183
6 249.2 -2.090 123.5 -0.800 143.75 -1.230 525.65 -5.000 342.4 -3.200 86.2 -0.632
8 276.3 -2.360 95.15 -0.500 177 -1.560 601.4 -5.000 443.35 -4.200 129.95 -1.069
10 304.2 -2.640 70.9 -0.300 208.9 -1.880 673.8 -6.000 -544.9 5.700 176.2 -1.532
127
Table 12.23 Principal plane Angle - Case1 - Plate Simply Supported on Edges (Corners free)
Load 1st Rosette (Strain Gauges 1,2&3) 2nd Rosette (Strain Gauges 4,5&6)
kg εx*10-4 εy*10-4 εxy*10-4 Angle εx*10-4 εy*10-4 εxy*10-4 Angle
0 0.000 0.000 0.000 90.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 90.000
2 -1.005 -0.600 -0.184 20.093 -2.000 -0.092 0.069 -2.032
4 -1.751 -0.900 0.204 -12.814 -4.000 -0.183 -0.044 0.695
6 -2.087 -1.000 0.827 -31.314 -5.000 -0.632 -0.510 7.018
8 -2.358 -2.000 1.412 -37.151 -5.000 -1.070 -0.922 11.370
10 -2.637 -2.000 1.953 -39.547 -6.000 -1.530 9.550 -38.161
Table 12.24 Bottom Strain gauge readings – Case2 - Plate Simply Supported on Edges (Corners restrained)
Bottom Strain Gage Reading
Load
Strain 1 Strain 2 Strain 3 Strain 4 Strain 5 Strain 6
in kg
Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading
0 79.4 36.9 70.3 41.8 44.3 33.1 148.0 115.7 7.4 -4.6 -19.6 -16.7
2 155.0 120.9 125.7 105.3 88.4 78.9 300.5 279.7 120.8 100.5 1.5 -1.4
4 201.3 177.1 107.4 100.2 114.0 98.6 391.7 374.0 233.0 215.0 38.5 28.6
6 228.8 216.3 74.6 73.3 146.9 135.4 474.4 464.2 341.8 326.5 77.9 70.8
8 251.7 249.0 44.6 46.4 177.9 170.1 547.8 540.3 438.8 428.1 115.4 109.0
10 270 270 17.9 17.9 200.9 200.9 607.3 607.3 371.1 371.1 147.2 147.2
128
Table 12.25 Bottom face Strains- Case2 - Plate Simply Supported on Edges (Corners restrained)
Table 12.26 Principal plane Angle – Case2 - Plate Simply Supported on Edges (Corners restrained)
Load 1st Rosette (Strain Gauges 1,2&3) 2nd Rosette (Strain Gauges 4,5&6)
kg εx*10-4 εy*10-4 εxy*10-4 Angle εx*10-4 εy*10-4 εxy*10-4 Angle
0 0.000 0.000 0.000 -22.511 0.000 -0.182 0.091 22.511
2 -0.798 -0.400 0.029 -4.767 -2.000 -0.517 -0.043 2.295
4 -1.311 -0.700 0.516 -29.216 -3.000 -0.925 -0.509 16.351
6 -1.644 -1.000 1.155 -37.514 -3.000 -1.300 -0.989 21.846
8 -1.922 -1.000 1.743 -40.385 -4.000 -1.650 -1.430 24.641
10 -2.119 -2.000 2.252 -41.876 -5.000 -0.182 -1.230 14.136
129
Table 12.27 Bottom Strain gauge readings – Case3 - Plate Simply Supported on Corners (Corners free)
Bottom Strain Gage Reading
Load
Strain 1 Strain 2 Strain 3 Strain 4 Strain 5 Strain 6
in kg
Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading
0 184.5 149.3 105.3 74.3 62.2 51.2 179.8 168.3 118.6 99.3 90.7 84.8
2 227.0 234.5 207.5 165.0 148.2 129.8 558.8 340.0 257.8 232.6 146.3 134.0
4 357.1 328.5 303.3 291.3 230.7 212.8 569.2 535.6 372.4 368 205.6 192
6 442.7 419.8 412.1 394.8 305.6 290.9 747.4 718.4 523.2 500.0 261.3 248.3
8 519.2 508.8 517.0 511.2 375.5 368.2 908.1 906.2 635.6 628.7 339.3 310.2
10 599.1 599.1 613.5 613.5 431.7 431.7 1061.6 1061.6 734.6 734.6 357.1 357.1
Table 12.28 Bottom face Strains- Case3 - Plate Simply Supported on Corners (Corners free)
Bottom Strain Gage Reading
Strain 1 Strain 2 Strain 3 Strain 4 Strain 5 Strain 6
Load in Strain1 Strain2 Strain3 Strain4 Strain5 Strain6
kg Average *10-4 Average *10-4 Average *10-4 Average *10-4 Average *10-4 Average *10-4
0 166.900 0.000 89.800 0.000 56.700 0.000 174.050 0.000 108.950 0.000 87.750 0.000
2 230.750 -0.639 186.250 -1.000 139.000 -0.823 449.400 -3.000 245.200 -1.363 140.150 -0.524
4 342.800 -1.759 297.300 -2.000 221.750 -1.650 552.400 -4.000 370.200 -2.613 198.800 -1.111
6 431.250 -2.644 403.450 -3.000 298.250 -2.420 732.900 -6.000 511.600 -4.027 254.800 -1.671
8 514.000 -3.471 514.100 -4.000 371.850 -3.150 907.150 -7.000 632.150 -5.232 324.750 -2.370
10 599.100 -4.322 613.500 -5.000 431.700 -3.750 1061.600 -9.000 734.600 -6.257 357.100 -2.694
130
Table 12.29 Principal plane Angle – Case3 - Plate Simply Supported on Corners (Corners free)
Load 1st Rosette (Strain Gauges 1,2&3) 2nd Rosette (Strain Gauges 4,5&6)
kg εx*10-4 εy*10-4 εxy*10-4 Angle εx*10-4 εy*10-4 εxy*10-4 Angle
0 0.000 0.000 0.000 90.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 90.000
2 -0.639 -0.800 -0.234 -34.249 -3.000 -0.524 0.276 -6.963
4 -1.759 -2.000 -0.370 40.853 -4.000 -1.110 -0.165 3.531
6 -2.644 -2.000 -0.607 39.702 -6.000 -1.670 -0.397 5.731
8 -3.471 -3.000 -0.932 40.156 -7.000 -2.370 -0.382 4.374
10 -4.322 -4.000 -1.201 38.322 -9.000 -2.690 -0.472 4.343
Table 12.30 Bottom Strain gauge readings – Case4 - Plate Simply Supported on Corners (Corners restrained)
131
Table 12.31 Bottom face Strains- Case4 - Plate Simply Supported on Corners (Corners restrained)
Table 12.32 Principal plane Angle – Case4 - Plate Simply Supported on Corners (Corners restrained)
Load 1st Rosette (Strain Gauges 1,2&3) 2nd Rosette (Strain Gauges 4,5&6)
kg εx*10-4 εy*10-4 εxy*10-4 Angle εx*10-4 εy*10-4 εxy*10-4 Angle
0 0.000 0.000 0.000 -22.511 0.000 0.000 0.000 90.000
2 -0.753 -0.700 0.190 -38.627 -2.000 -0.305 0.006 -0.207
4 -1.252 -1.000 0.032 10.049 -4.000 -0.592 -0.076 1.487
6 -1.954 -2.000 0.117 24.199 -5.000 -1.010 -0.112 1.532
8 -2.624 -3.000 -0.008 -2.702 -4.000 -1.330 -1.550 24.505
10 -6.207 -3.000 1.212 -20.192 -8.000 -1.730 -0.329 2.969
132
Fig. 12.21 Plot of Load Vs. Strain Curve for Strain Gage -1 Under Different
Boundary Conditions (For Bottom side)
Fig. 12.22 Plot of Load Vs. Strain Curve for Strain Gage -2 Under Different
Boundary Conditions (For Bottom side)
133
Fig. 12.23 Plot of Load Vs. Strain Curve for Strain Gage-3 Under Different
Boundary Conditions (For Bottom side)
Fig. 12.24 Plot of Load Vs. Strain Curve for Strain Gage-4 Under Different
Boundary Conditions (For Bottom side)
134
Fig. 12.25 Plot of Load Vs. Strain Curve for Strain Gage-5 Under Different
Boundary Conditions (For Bottom side)
Fig. 12.26 Plot of Load Vs. Strain Curve for Strain Gage-6 Under Different
Boundary Conditions (For Bottom side)
135
Fig. 12.27 Principal plane angle Vs Load relationship for case-1 Plate Simply
Supported on Edges (Corners free) (For Bottom side)
Fig. 12.28 Principal plane angle Vs Load relationship for case-2 Plate Simply
Supported on Edges (Corners restrained) (For Bottom side)
136
Fig. 12.29 Principal plane angle Vs Load relationship for case-3 Plate Simply
Supported on Corners (Corners free) (For Bottom side)
Fig. 12.30 Principal plane angle Vs Load relationship for case-4 Plate Simply
Supported on Corners (Corners restrained) (For Bottom side)
12.6 Conclusion
137
EXPERIMENT 13
To find Modulus of Elasticity (E) and Poisson’s ratio (µ) of an acryllic flat
simply supported at its ends and subjected to four points loading on the beam.
13.2 Apparatus
13.3 Theory
The basic assumptions of flexure theory are as follows. Plane section remains
plane before bending and after bending. Material should follow Hook’s law within
elastic limit. Material should be homogeneous, isotropic, and free from residual
stresses. Compression flange is laterally restrained. Load is applied gradually.
Flexure formula
M f E
= =
I y R
Moment versus curvature relationship
M 1
= =φ
EI R
Curvature, φ= (є1+ є2) / d;
Where ε = strain in extreme fiber.
W W
aL (1-2a)L aL
Deflection
138
The deflection is given by,
a (3 − 4a 2 )WL3
∆=
24 EI
The Young’s Modulus of Elasticity can be calculated using the load
displacement graph. This value is compared with the value obtained from deflection
formulae. The Poisson’s ratio (µ) of the steel is calculated plotting graph between
lateral strain to longitudinal strain.
13.4 Procedure
The acrylic flat is supported with one side hinge and other side roller
condition. The dial gauges and strain gauges are fixed at the center of the flat. Two
steel hooks are placed on the beam at equal distance from center of the beam. The
beam is loaded by equal loads on the steel hooks. Readings on the gauges are taken
for loading and the procedure is repeated for unloading also. The steel hooks are
moved to new position towards the support by equal amount from center. Experiment
is repeated for three such different positions of application of loading. Load Vs
deflection and Lateral strain Vs Longitudinal strain graphs were plotted
13.5 Precautions
Take the dial gauge reading only when the loads are perfectly vertical without
oscillations. Take the strain gauge readings only when the readings get stabilized.
139
13.6 Observation and Calculation
Load Deflection
Loading Unloading Average
(kg) (mm)
0 0 2220 2184 2202
0.5 4.905 1810 1744 1777
1 9.81 1351 1351 1351
The slope given by the below graph are the ratio of W/∆, from those ratios using the
a(3 − 4a 2 )WL3
formula ∆= , we can calculate the modulus of elasticity.
24 EI
The value of modulus of elasticity E = 1.83 x105 N/mm2
140
Table 13.2 Strain Gauge Readings
141
13.7 Result
13.8 Conclusions
Load is linearly varying with the deflections as the stress induced by the
applied load is still within the Proportionality limit. Even though we applied four
point load method for getting pure bending, it is not possible to get pure bending,
because the applied point load will affect the local region in terms of shear that makes
shear deformation across the section.
142