VFB2052 CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY 1

MS NIRAKU ROSMAWATI BINTI AHMAD

TITLE ASSIGNMENT:
DEFLECTION OF A SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM

GROUP 4

No Student Name Student ID

1 Siti Nur Maizurah Binti Mohd Jasmin 22006396
2 Muhammad Nazrin Hilman Bin Rosman 22007057
3 Raj Olikh 21001747
4 Diya Armani Binti Zahib 21001364
INTRODUCTION
The experiment "Deflection of a Simply Supported Beam" is a fundamental
investigation in engineering mechanics, focusing on understanding the behavior of beams
subjected to loading conditions. In this experiment, a simply supported beam, typically made
of a material like steel or aluminum, is analyzed to determine its deflection under various loads.

The primary objective of the experiment is to study how different loads applied to a
beam affect its deflection, which is the extent to which the beam bends or deforms under the
applied load. Understanding beam deflection is essential in engineering design, as it directly
impacts the structural integrity and performance of bridges, buildings, and other structures.

In the experiment, the simply supported beam is placed horizontally and supported at
its ends, creating a classic beam configuration. Various loads are then applied to the beam,
either through point loads, distributed loads, or a combination of both. The deflection of the
beam is typically measured using displacement sensors or dial gauges placed at specific points
along the beam's length.

By analyzing the deflection data collected during the experiment, engineers can
determine how different factors, such as load magnitude, beam material properties, and beam
geometry, influence the beam's response to loading. This information is critical for designing
structures that can withstand expected loads while meeting safety and performance
requirements.

Overall, the experiment "Deflection of a Simply Supported Beam" serves as a

fundamental learning tool for engineering students, providing hands-on experience with
concepts related to structural mechanics and helping them develop the skills necessary for
designing safe and efficient structures in real-world applications.
PROCEDURE
1. The two assembled support systems were bolted to the support frame using the plate and
bolt supplied with the apparatus. The distance between the two supports was equal to the span
of the beams to be tested.

2. The width and depth of the specimen were measured, and the readings were noted
(measurements were taken at three locations and the average reading was recorded).

3. The beam specimen was placed onto the support.

4. The load hanger was fixed at the mid-span of the beam.

5. The dial gauge was positioned at the mid-span of the beam to measure the resulting
deflection.

6. The dial gauge reading was zeroed.

7. A suitable load was placed on the load hanger, and the resulting dial gauge reading was
noted.

8. The load on the load hanger was increased at suitable increments, and for each increment,
the dial gauge readings were noted.

9. When the desired maximum load was reached, the loading on the load hanger was
decreased at the same increments as above until all loads were removed from the load hanger.
RESULT

Load vs Experimental & Theoretical Deflection

1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
Deflection

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
2N 4N 6N 8N 10N 12N 14N
Load, N

Experimental Theoretical

𝑏ℎ3
Moment of inertia of beam specimen, I =
12

(23.89)(6.04)3
=
12

= 438.68 mm
 𝑊𝐿3
Theoretical Mid-Span Deflection, ∆ =
48𝐸𝐼

(2)(0.8)3
∆1 = = 0.243 mm
48(200×109 )(4.39×10−10 )

(4)(0.8)3
∆2 = = 0.486 mm
48(200×109 )(4.39×10−10 )

(6)(0.8)3
∆3 = = 0.729 mm
48(200×109 )(4.39×10−10 )

(8)(0.8)3
∆4 = −10 = 0.972 mm
48(200×109 )(4.39×10 )

(10)(0.8)3
∆5 = = 1.215 mm
48(200×109 )(4.39×10−10 )

(12)(0.8)3
∆6 = = 1.458 mm
48(200×109 )(4.39×10−10 )

(14)(0.8)3
∆7 = = 1.701 mm
48(200×109 )(4.39×10−10 )

Relationship Between the Applied Load and The Resulting Displacement

The relationship between the applied load and the resulting displacement in the
deflection of a simply supported beam is typically described by the bending equation. This
equation is based on the beam's material properties, geometry, and the applied load. For small
deflections and linear elastic materials, the equation is often expressed as:

𝑃𝐿3
𝛿=
48𝐸𝐼
where:

- δ is the maximum deflection at the center of the beam,

- P is the applied load,

- L is the span (distance between the supports),

- E is the modulus of elasticity of the material,

- I is the moment of inertia of the beam's cross-sectional shape.

This equation assumes that the material of the beam behaves elastically and obeys
Hooke's law, and that the deflections are small enough to maintain linearity. It is important to
note that this relationship is a simplified representation, and real-world conditions may
introduce additional complexities.

For more accurate predictions, especially when dealing with larger deflections or non-
linear material behavior, finite element analysis or experimental data may be necessary.
Experimentally, you can measure the deflection of the beam under different loads and use
regression analysis to determine the relationship between the applied load and the resulting
displacement for your specific case.

How Does the Experimental Result Differs with The Theoretical in Terms of Accuracy

The experimental results of deflection in a simply supported beam can often differ from
theoretical predictions due to various factors. Here are some reasons for discrepancies between
experimental and theoretical results:

1. Material Properties: The theoretical calculations assume linear elastic behavior of the
material. However, real materials may exhibit non-linear behavior, especially under high loads
or in the case of materials like plastics and rubbers.

2. Beam Imperfections: Real-world beams may have imperfections, such as irregularities in the
material or manufacturing defects, that are not considered in the theoretical model.

3. Support Conditions: The assumption of perfect simple support in theoretical models may not
be exactly replicated in experiments. Small imperfections in the support conditions can affect
the beam's behavior.
4. Loading Conditions: The theoretical model assumes a perfectly distributed load, while
experimental setups may have variations in load distribution. Point loads or unevenly
distributed loads can lead to differences in deflection.

5. Temperature and Environmental Factors: Changes in temperature, humidity, and other

environmental conditions can affect the material properties and alter the beam's behavior.

6. Creep and Fatigue: Over time, especially in long-duration experiments, materials may
undergo creep (slow deformation under constant load) or fatigue, leading to additional
deflection not considered in theoretical models.

7. Measurement Errors: Experimental setups involve various instruments and sensors to

measure deflection. Errors in measurement equipment, sensor calibration, or data recording
can introduce discrepancies.

8. Dynamic Effects: Theoretical models often assume static loading conditions. In dynamic
loading situations, the behavior of the beam may differ due to dynamic effects and vibrations.

To enhance the accuracy of experimental results, it's crucial to carefully control experimental
conditions, use high-quality materials, consider the effects of imperfections, and calibrate
measurement instruments. Additionally, comparing experimental data with multiple theoretical
models or performing a sensitivity analysis can provide insights into the factors contributing to
any discrepancies.
DISCUSSION
The experiment on the deflection of a simply supported beam provides valuable insights
into the behaviour of structural elements under different loading conditions. Through a detailed
examination of the results and a comparison with theoretical predictions, we can better
understand the significance of the findings and their implications for engineering practice.

The experiment followed a systematic procedure, starting with the assembly of support
systems and measurement of beam dimensions. Load increments were applied to the beam at
its mid-span, and corresponding deflections were recorded using a dial gauge. The measured
deflections were then compared against theoretical calculations based on the bending equation.

Upon analysis of the results, it is evident that there is a correlation between the applied
load and the resulting deflection of the beam. As expected, increasing the applied load led to a
proportional increase in beam deflection. This observation aligns with the fundamental
principles of structural mechanics and validates the theoretical model used in the experiment.

The hypothesis of the experiment likely posited that the deflection of the simply
supported beam would increase linearly with the applied load, in accordance with the bending
equation. The purpose of the experiment was to verify this hypothesis and explore the factors
influencing beam deflection, including material properties and geometry.

The results obtained from the experiment generally support the hypothesis, indicating a
linear relationship between applied load and beam deflection. However, it is essential to
acknowledge potential sources of error that may have influenced the results.

One potential source of error in the experiment could be inaccuracies in measuring

beam dimensions or applying loads. Variations in beam dimensions or uneven load distribution
may have affected the deflection measurements, leading to discrepancies between theoretical
predictions and experimental results. Additionally, imperfections in the beam material or
support conditions could have contributed to deviations from the expected outcomes.

Furthermore, environmental factors such as temperature variations may have influenced

the material properties of the beam, impacting its behavior under load. Measurement errors,
including parallax errors in reading the dial gauge or calibration inaccuracies, could also have
affected the accuracy of the results.

In summary, the experiment on the deflection of a simply supported beam provides

valuable insights into the behaviour of structural elements under load. While the results
generally support the hypothesis and demonstrate the expected relationship between applied
load and deflection, it is essential to acknowledge potential sources of error and uncertainties
in the experimental setup.

Moving forward, further experimentation with controlled variables and rigorous

measurement techniques can help refine the understanding of beam deflection and enhance the
accuracy of predictions. By addressing potential sources of error and conducting
comprehensive analyses, engineers can develop more reliable models for designing structures
that meet safety and performance requirements in real-world applications.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the experiment "Deflection of a Simply Supported Beam" has provided
valuable insights into the behavior of beams under various loading conditions. Through this
experiment, we have investigated how different loads applied to a simply supported beam
affect its deflection, which is crucial for understanding the structural performance of beams in
engineering applications.

By analyzing the deflection data collected during the experiment, we have observed
how factors such as load magnitude, beam material properties, and beam geometry influence
the beam's response to loading. This understanding is essential for engineers in designing
structures that can withstand expected loads while ensuring safety and performance.

Furthermore, the experiment has reinforced key theoretical concepts in structural

mechanics, including the principles of elasticity, equilibrium, and deformation. It has also
emphasized the importance of accurate measurements and data analysis in engineering
practice.

Overall, the experiment "Deflection of a Simply Supported Beam" serves as a valuable

educational tool for engineering students, providing hands-on experience with fundamental
concepts in structural engineering. Through this experiment, we have gained insights that
contribute to the foundation of engineering knowledge and the development of effective design
practices for structures in various engineering disciplines.