See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/351686835

Laboratory Experiment: Thin-Walled Cylinder

Experiment Findings · May 2021

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10293.81129

CITATIONS READS

0 19,227

1 author:

Keerthana Dana Sekaran

Curtin University
8 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Keerthana Dana Sekaran on 19 May 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 MCEN2000 – Fundamentals of Strength of Materials

Laboratory Report: Thin-Walled Cylinder

Name: Keerthana Dana Sekaran

Student ID: 19939889
Date Performed: 4.05.2021
Table of Contents

1. Objectives .............................................................................................................................................. 3

2. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 3

3. Nomenclature ........................................................................................................................................ 3

4. Theory and Background ........................................................................................................................ 4

5. Data Collection ...................................................................................................................................... 5

6. Analysis of Experimental Data .......................................................................................................... 6-9

6.1 Open end Condition............................................................................................................................ 6,7
6.2 Closed end Condition ......................................................................................................................... 8,9
6.3 Sample Calculations .............................................................................................................................. 9

7. Discussion .......................................................................................................................................... 10

8. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 10

9. References ........................................................................................................................................... 11

Thin-Wall Cylinder | Laboratory Report 2

Objectives:

• To understand the characteristics of a thin-walled cylindrical pressure vessel due to application of load.
• To perform a detailed study of a uniaxial load case and a bi-axial load case on the thin wall cylinder.

Introduction:
This experiment provides the insight on thin-walled pressure cylinders where thickness is less than or equal to
10% of the internal diameter when axial and biaxial load is applied on it. Essentially, behavior of the cylinder
will be analyzed based on stresses and strains with respect to pressure applied on it. When the load is applied,
cylinder experiences tensile and hoop/circumferential stress. Using these data, Young’s Modulus is calculated.
The possible source of error could be due to excess pressure applied on the hydraulic hand-pump. The
maximum pressure that can be applied in the experiment is 3Mpa.

Fig1: Test Equipment/ Apparatus

Nomenclature:
Symbol Parameter
θ Angle
ℇ Strain
σ Stress
v Poisson’s Ration
ℇhoop Strain experienced by Hoop/Circumferential object
ℇaxial Strain experienced axially
σhoop Stress experienced by hoop
σaxial Stress experienced axially
E Young’s Modulus or Modulus of Elasticity
p Pressure
d Diameter of the cylinder
t Thickness of the cylinder

Thin-Wall Cylinder | Laboratory Report 3

Theory & Background:

(a) Open condition

(1) Estimation of Poisson’s ratio: Poisson’s ratio is the negative ratio between lateral strain and longitudinal
strain. It is denoted by “ν”.

ℇ𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝑣= −
ℇℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝

𝑣 = 𝑃𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑜𝑛′ 𝑠 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜
ℇ𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 𝐴𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑦𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 (𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑣𝑒)
ℇℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝 = Transversal strain acting on the cylinder around the circumference (Tensile)

(2) Estimation of Young’s Modulus: Young’s Modulus is the ratio between stress and strain. It is also called
as modulus of elasticity. Any material when force is applied can resist its elastic property till certain limit.
Beyond that limit, it tends to show plastic property. In uniaxial load, due to internal pressure, tensile
forces act on the cylinder on horizontal direction. This explains that Young’s modulus is calculated only
for hoop stress and strain. Young’s Modulus can be denoted by “E” and SI units in “GPa”.

𝜎ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝
𝐸=
ℇℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝

𝐸 = 𝑌𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑔′ 𝑠 𝑀𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑙𝑢𝑠 𝑜𝑟 𝑀𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑙𝑢𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝐸𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦

𝜎ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝 = 𝐻𝑜𝑜𝑝 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟
ℇℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝 = 𝐻𝑜𝑜𝑝 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟
𝑝𝑟
Stress can be calculated using, 𝜎ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝 = 𝑡 where p is the pressure, r is the radius and t is the thickness.
For each pressure value, stress can be calculated.

(b) Closed condition

(a) To calculate the theoretical values for gauges 1, 2 and 6: Since, the load is under biaxial condition.
Internal pressure causes the load on axial and circumferential directions. Hence, theoretical load values
can be calculated using,
𝑝𝑟 𝑝𝑟
𝜎ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝 = 𝑡
𝜎𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 2𝑡

Considering Hooke’s Law, equation can be formed using stress-strain relationship with respect to
Young’s Modulus.
(𝜎ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝 −𝑣𝜎𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 ) (𝜎𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 −𝑣𝜎ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝 )
ℇℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝 = 𝐸
ℇ𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 𝐸

(b) To calculate the theoretical values for gauges 3, 4 and 5: The following strain transformation is used in
the calculation.
ℇ2 + ℇ1 ℇ2 + ℇ1
ℇ= + (𝐶𝑜𝑠2𝜃)
2 2

Thin-Wall Cylinder | Laboratory Report 4

Data Collection:
Experiment 1: Experimental strain readings with open ends condition.
(Strain is measured in micro strain, i.e., 10-6)

1st attempt 2nd attempt

Pressure Gauge number Gauge number
(MN/m2) (1) (2) (1) (2)
0.5 -26 80 -28
81
1.0 178 -61 -61
177
1.5 275 -96 276 -95
2.0 368 369 -129
-127
2.5 464 -163
465 -162
3.0 557 -193 557 -194
Table 1: Strain readings for 2 attempts.

Experiment 2: Experimental strain readings with close ends condition.

(Strain is measured in micro strain, i.e., 10-6)

Pressure Gauge number

(MN/m2) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
0.5 70 20 45 71
29 57
1.0 147 37 59 93 119 150
1.5 225 53 90 140 181 227
2.0 301 68 121 186 305
243
2.5 381 84 151 233 305 382
3.0 459 100 369 462
183 280

Table 2a: Strain readings for 1st attempt.

Pressure Gauge number

(MN/m2) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
0.5 69 21 29 44 54 68
1.0 150 37 61 94 120 150
1.5 230 53 92 142 185 232
2.0 307 69 123 187 306
245
2.5 235 302
388 86 154 384
3.0 462 101 184 281 465
372

Table 2b: Strain readings for 2nd attempt.

Thin-Wall Cylinder | Laboratory Report 5

Data Analysis:
a. Open End Condition

(1) Estimation of Poisson’s ratio:

Average readings for the two Poisson’s ratio

Pressure attempts
(MN/m2) Average Average Using 4 Using 2
readings for readings for decimal decimal
gauge (1) gauge (2) places places
(hoop strain) (Axial strain)
0.5 80.5 -27 0.3354 0.34
1.0 177.5 -61 0.3437 0.34
1.5 275.5 -95.5 0.3466 0.35
2.0 368.5 -128 0.3474 0.35
2.5 464.5 -162.5 0.3498 0.35
3.0 557 -193.5 0.3474 0.35

Table 3 : Estimated values for Poisson’s ratio.

Relation between Hoop strain and Axial Strain

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
-50

-100
ℇaxial

-150

-200

-250
ℇhoop

Fig2: Graphical relation between Hoop strain and Axial strain

Conclusion: the experimental obtained value for Poisson’s ratio is 0.3466

Thin-Wall Cylinder | Laboratory Report 6

(2) Estimation of Young’s Modulus:
Pressure Hoop stress Average hoop Young’s
(MN/m2) pd strain readings (εh) modulus = ( σh )/
σh =
2t (εh)
0.5 7.17 80.5 0.0890
1.0 14.33 177.5 0.0807
1.5 21.50 275.5 0.0780
2.0 28.67 368.5 0.0778
2.5 35.83 464.5 0.0771
3.0 43.00 557 0.0771

Table 4: Estimated Values for Young’s Modulus

Relation between Hoop stress and strain

50
45
Calculated Hoop Stress

40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Average Hoop Strain

Fig3: Graphical relation between hoop stress and average hoop strain

Conclusion : the experimental obtained value for Young’s modulus is 0.07885

Thin-Wall Cylinder | Laboratory Report 7

 b. Closed End Condition
At Gauge 3, θ=330º
Gauge 4, θ=45º
Gauge 5, θ=40º

Pressure Gauge number

(MN/m2) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
0.5 111.39 80.52 81.06 102.87 97.66 111.39

1.0 222.77 161.03 162.12 205.74 195.31 222.77

1.5 334.16 241.55 243.17 308.60 292.97 334.16

2.0 445.55 322.07 324.23 411.47 390.62 445.55

2.5 556.94 402.59 405.29 514.34 488.28 556.94

3.0 668.32 483.10 486.35 617.21 585.94 668.32

Table 5: Closed end condition theoretical values

Gauge number
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
0.5 69.5 20.5 29 44.5 55.5 69.5

1.0 148.5 37 60 93.5 119.5 150

1.5 227.5 53 91 141 183 229.5

2.0 304 68.5 122 186.5 244 305.5

2.5 384.5 85 152.5 234 303.5 383

3.0 460.5 100.5 183.5 280.5 370.5 463.5

Table 6: Average experimental values for the closed end condition

Percentage discrepancy is calculated to get the ideal value after calculating theoretical and obtained
experimental data.
(𝐸𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 − 𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒)
% 𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑦 =
𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒

Thin-Wall Cylinder | Laboratory Report 8

 Pressure Gauge number
(MN/m2) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
0.5 37.61 74.54 64.22 56.74 43.17 37.61

1.0 33.34 77.02 62.99 54.55 38.82 32.67

1.5 31.92 78.06 62.58 54.31 37.54 31.32

2.0 31.77 78.73 62.37 54.68 37.54 31.43

2.5 30.96 78.89 62.37 54.50 37.84 31.23

3.0 31.10 79.20 62.27 54.55 36.77 30.65

Table 7: Percentage Discrepancy between theoretical and experimental Data

Sample Calculations:
(a) Sample calculation for Hoop stress:
(p x d) / 2t
Outer Diameter = 86mm / 86 x 10-3 m
Thickness = 3mm or 3 x 10-3 m
Stress = 0.5 x 86 x 10^-3 / 2 x 3 x 10^-3 = 7.17

(b) Theoretical values for Gauge 1,2,6:

(𝜎ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝 −𝑣𝜎𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 ) (𝜎𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 −𝑣𝜎ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝 )
ℇℎ𝑜𝑜𝑝 = ℇ𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑎𝑙 =
𝐸 𝐸

[3.58−(035×7.17)]/ 0.08 = 80.52

(c) Theoretical values for Gauge 3,4,5:

ℇ2 + ℇ1 ℇ2 + ℇ1
ℇ= + (𝐶𝑜𝑠2𝜃)
2 2
[80.5+111.39]/2 + [80.5+111.39] (𝑐𝑜𝑠2 × 330)/2 = 81.06

Thin-Wall Cylinder | Laboratory Report 9

Discussion:

The main purpose of the report is to understand and analyze stresses and strains in open and closed end
conditions. Initially, data is collected at open end condition, where two attempts were performed to obtain
accurate readings. In this scenario, uniaxial load is applicable, strain on the cylinder is recorded. The difference
between attempt 1 and attempt is ∓1. The possibility of error is comparatively less. Readings in table 1 are
used for estimating poison’s ratio. After plotting a graph between axial strain and hoop strain is linear and the
gradient obtained, I.e., Poisson’s ratio is 0.3466.
Once the Poisson’s ratio is estimated, young’s modulus is evaluated by calculating hoop stress, with thickness,
diameter, and pressure readings. Hoop strain is obtained using Table 1 after averaging the data sets of attempts
1 and 2 to get accurate readings. After plotting these values, the gradient obtained I.e., Young’s Modulus is
around 0.07885. Theoretically young’s modulus value is 0.075567. The possible source of error is due to
approximation after averaging data and estimating hoop stress. Theoretically this data is valid, however
diameter and thickness readings could be varied due to exposing test material to atmosphere. Graph depicts
linear property between stress and strain.
Using strain transformation, calculations can be done at closed end conditions. Experiment was performed that
included recording the values of six (6) different gauges in different directions. Gauges 1, 2 and 6 are positioned
at a 90 ° angle (horizontal and vertical angles). Gauges 3, 4, and 5 are placed at angles of 330 °, 45 °, and 40
°, respectively. The values obtained are acceptable and nearly close to the experimental values. Positioning of
strain gauges for this section is essential, it is important to check so that the experiment is carried out carefully.
Once theoretical and practical values are grouped, percentage discrepancy/difference is calculated to
understand the accuracy of the values. It ranges from nearly 30% to 70%. The maximum difference between
theoretical and practical data could be due to improper data collection and poor calculated approximations.
Minor change could affect the data. These considerations should be checked before collecting the data. To
check if there is any major implications, theoretical calculations can be re-checked to ensure reliability. Since
the data was only limited to two attempts, more attempts could increase data accuracy.

Conclusion:
The experiment was successfully completed and the relations between parameters suggest the theory as well.
However, multiple attempts and more Data for closed end conditions could improve accuracy. Initial objectives
of the experiment are met. Stress and strain relationship in the graph proves to be accurate due to linearity.
Careful monitoring of pressure gauge and operating hydraulic hand-pump is crucial in taking accurate data
sets.

Thin-Wall Cylinder | Laboratory Report 10

 References:
THIN CYLINDER. (2021, May 16). Retrieved May 16, 2021, from https://www.tecquipment.com/thin-
cylinder

Thin-Wall Cylinder | Laboratory Report 11

View publication stats