Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Reaction of A Continous Beam

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 7

TABLE OF CONTENT

INTRODUCTION 1
OBJECTIVES 1
THEORY 1
APPARATUS 2
PROCEDURE 3
DATA AND RESULT 4
DISCUSSION 4
CONCLUSION 5
REFERENCES 5
INTRODUCTION
A beam is a structural member designed primarily to support forces acting
perpendicular to the axis of the member. Beams are of different types, the most
common types of beams are :
1. Fixed End Beam (indeterminate)
2. Continous beam(indeterminate)
3. Simple beam(determinate)
A fixed end beam is a beam that is restricted from movement at both ends. A
continuous beam is a statically indeterminate structure. They are used to
increase structures strength and provide alternate load paths in cases of failure.
A continuous beam has advantages over a simple beam in terms of lesser mid
span deflection which is less and a higher vertical load capacity.
A pinned support is a type of support that can resist both horizontal and vertical
forces. The experiment was carried out in the structures laboratory.

OBJECTIVES
To determine the reaction of a two-span continuous beam.

THEORY
Typical reactions at the support of a continuous beam is as shown below.
W
L/2

13 W/ 32 LL 22 W/32 LR 3W/22
Ay By Cy

Figure 1
APPARATUS
1. A support frame.
2. 3 Nos. reaction support pier.
3. 2 Nos. load hangers.
4. A meter ruler to measure the span of the beam.
5. Beam specimen.
6. A meter ruler to measure the span of the beam.
7. A set of weights.
Figure 2 : A support frame Figure 3 : A set of weights

Figure 4 : 3 Nos reaction of pier Figure 5 : 2 Nos of load hangers

Figure 6 : Ruler
PROCEDURE
1. Switch on the display unit to warm up the unit.
2. Clamped the reaction piers to the support frame using the plate and bolt
supplied with the apparatus and at predetermine distant between the
supports.
3. Place the beam specimen between the two cylindrical pieces of each
support.Tightened the two screws at the top of each support with your
fingers.
4. Fix the load hanger at the position where the beam is to be loaded.
5. Connect the load cell from the support pier to the display unit, each load
cell occupying one terminal on the display.
6. Beginning with channel 1 record the initial reading for each channel.
7. Place a suitable load on the hanger and note the reading of each load
cell.Thid represents the reaction at each pier.
8. Increase the load on the load hanger at suitable increments and for each
increment record the pier reaction.
DATA AND RESULT
Left – Hand span of beam, L L = 500 mm
Right – Hand span of the beam, LR = 500 mm
Distance of load from left-hand support, X L = 250 mm
Distance of load from the right-hand support, X R = 250 mm

Load On Support Reaction


LL
Experimental Theoretical
N Left, Middle, Right, Left, Middle, Right,
(RA) N (RB) N (RC) N (RA) N (RB) N (RC) N
0 0 10 22.3 0 0 0
2 0.8 11.4 22.1 0.81 1.38 0.19
4 1.7 12.7 21.9 1.63 2.75 0.38
6 2.5 14.1 21.7 2.44 4.13 0.56
8 3.4 15.4 21.6 3.25 5.50 0.75
10 4.2 16.8 21.3 4.06 6.88 0.94

Table 1 : Reaction At The Support

DISCUSSION
Aluminium has a higher modulus of elasticity than steel and therefore the
reaction at the supports will be lower when aluminium is used.
The theory of young’s modulus is used in this case which is a material’s
resistance to elastic deformation. The elasticity (E) will change here but the
moment of inertia (I) will remain the same since the forces are not acting at an
angle.
A thinner beam would affect support reaction since a thinner beam is much less
stiffer than a thick beam. The reaction at the support will be higher with a
thinner than with a thicker one.
There is a very small discrepancy between the experimental results and the
theoretical results. The graphs show a similar trend when the two values are
compared.
Factors that may have led to discrepancies in the values include :
1. Misreading of experimental values by the group members.
2. Wrong experimental setup of the apparatus.
CONCLUSION
In conclusions, the reaction at the span continuous beam will increase with an
increase in the load. Other factors like the distance of the load from the
supports, type of material and width will also affect the reaction.
Errors in this experiment can be minimised through :
1. Careful reading of data from the group members and confirmation from a
second group member.
2. Ensuring that a well qualified laboratory assistant guides in the setting up
of the apparatus.
From results for experimental and theoretical have totally different for reaction
at By and Cy it is because of apparatus not function well during experiment.
If a thinner beam is used, the reaction at the support will be higher with a
thinner beam than with a thicker one. It is because thinner beam is much less
stiffer than a thick beam.
Compare to steel, aluminium has a higher modulus of elasticity. It is because
aluminium has a higher modulus of elasticity than steel and effect when used it,
the reaction at the supports will be lower. The elasticity (E) will change here
but the moment of inertia (I)will remain the same since the forces are not acting
at an angle.
If a thinner beam is used, the reaction at the support will be higher with a
thinner beam than with a thicker one. It is because thinner beam is much less
stiffer than a thick beam.
Typically, equipment is the most commonly evaluated influence when
performing uncertainty analysis. It is not unusual for laboratories to do
experiments on their equipment to quantify sources of uncertainty example
repeatability. Therefore, it is important to consider what equipment will be used
to perform measurements.
REFERENCES
http://www.academia.edu/9659068/EXPERIMENTAL_SET_UP_FOR_CONTI
NUOUS_BEAM

You might also like