Buckling of Struts
Instructed by :
Dr. M.T.P Hettiarachchi
Name
Index No
Course
Group
Date of Per
Date of sub
: Jayasiri G.P
: 120254B
: B.Sc. Eng (Civil)
: A4
: 22-05-2014
: 06-05-2014
Calculations and results
PE
Euler buckling load.
Youngs Modulus
Second Moment of Area of the cross section
Length of the strut.
Second moment of area about y axis =
=
=
1
BD 3
12
1
20.2 3.13
12
50.15 mm 4
2 105 Nmm 2
Youngs modulus of the strut
Dial gauge constant
Theoretical and experimental Buckling loads were calculated for the given three end
0.01 mm
conditions. Theoretical values can be calculated using the Euler Buckling Load
formula as the practical values can be taken by drawing graphs
vs p
.
Both ends Pinned Strut
2 EI
PE 2
L
One end is fixed and other is pinned,
2 2 EI
PE
L2
Both ends Fixed Strut,
4 2 EI
PE
L2
P vs
and
P(N)
(mm)
/P(mm/N)
39.24
0.19
0.0048
78.48
0.81
0.010
117.2
1.99
0.0169
135.53
3.38
0.025
143.38
4.35
0.030
151.23
6.48
0.0428
159.08
10.52
0.066
buckling load (Theoretical)
2 2 105 50.15
7502
175.99 N
Experimental values
According to the P vs. graph, the value for P E
Condition
1: 75 cm
long strut
with both
ends
pinned.
2 EI
L2
161 N
Euler
According to the vs. /p graph, the value for P E
=
=
Percentage error =
Percentage error from P vs
Percentage error from vs /P
=
=
8.1 0.5
2
10
5.3
0.6
161.7 N
PE exp t PE theo
100%
PE theo
mP1P2
161 175.99
100
175.99
8.51%
161.7 175.99
100
175.99
8.12%
Condition 2: 75 cm long strut with one end fixed and one end pinned.
Euler buckling load (Theoretical)
=
=
Experimental values
2 2 EI
L2
2 2 2 105 50.15
7502
351.97 N
P(N)
(mm)
/P(mm/N)
78.48
0.01
0.00012
117.72
0.30
0.00255
156.96
0.75
0.00478
196.2
1.43
0.0073
235.44
2.81
0.012
274.68
4.46
0.016
313.92
7.60
0.024
321.768
8.67
0.027
329.616
9.83
0.030
387.484
10.63
0.031
vs. graph, the value for PE
344.4 N
According to the vs. /p graph, the value for P E
=
=
Percentage error =
mP1P2
8.95 0.4
2
10
2.83 0.33
342 N
PE exp t PE theo
100%
theo
P
Percentage error from P vs
=
=
Accordi
ng to
the P
Percentage error from vs /P
=
=
344.4 351.97
100
351.97
2.15%
342 351.97
100
351.97
2.83%
Condition 3: 75 cm long strut with both ends fixed.
Euler buckling load (Theoretical)
4 2 EI
L2
P(N)
(mm)
/Px10-3(mm/N)
78.48
0.02
0.255
156.96
0.31
1.975
235.44
1.05
4.459
313.92
1.85
5.893
392.4
3.28
8.359
431.64
4.65
10.773
470.88
6.10
12.954
510.12
7.86
15.408
549.36
10.10
18.385
588.6
12.78
21.713
4 2 2 105 50.15
7502
=
Experimental values
703.94 N
According to the P vs. graph, the value for P E
According to the vs. /p graph, the value for P E
=
=
=
=
Percentage error =
Percentage error from P vs
Percentage error from vs /P
=
=
mP1P2
10.7 0.6
3
10
20 4
631.25 N
PE exp t PE theo
100%
PE theo
606 N
606 703.94
100
703.94
13.91%
631.25 703.94
100
703.94
10.33%
Condition 4: 62.5 cm long strut with both ends fixed.
Euler buckling load (Theoretical)
=
=
Experimental values
4 2 EI
L2
4 2 2 105 50.15
6252
1013.68 N
P(N)
(mm)
/Px10-3(mm/N)
78.48
0.53
6.753
156.96
1.66
10.576
235.44
2.63
11.171
313.92
3.97
12.647
392.4
5.47
13.94
431.64
6.17
14.294
470.88
7.28
15.460
510.12
8.85
17.343
549.36
10.10
18.386
588.6
12.50
21.237
vs. graph, the value for PE
620 N
According to the vs. /p graph, the value for P E
=
=
Percentage error =
mP1P2
11.6 1.95
2
10
20 10
965 N
PE exp t PE theo
100%
theo
P
Percentage error from P vs
=
=
Accordi
ng to
the P
Percentage error from vs /P
=
=
620 1013.68
100
1013.68
38.83%
965 1013.68
100
1013.68
4.80%
Summery
Length and
the
Theoretical Experimental Experimental
Percentage
Load
Load(N)
Load(N)
(N)
(P vs )
( vs /P)
175.99
161
161.7
-8.51%
-8.12%
351.97
344.4
342
-2.15%
-2.83%
703.94
606
631.25
-13.91%
-10.33%
1013.68
620
965
-38.83%
-4.80%
End
condition
75cm
Both ends
Percentag
Error
(P vs )
Error
( vs /P)
pinned
75cm
One end
fixed
75cm
Both ends
fixed
60cm
Both ends
fixed
Comments
We can see that there is a huge error of the Euler buckling load of both ends fixed
60cm length strut when use the P vs graph to calculate it. Main reason for that is
we havent reached the point where the gradient becomes zero.
Most of the other percentage errors are less than 10% so we can conclude that
errors we have done throughout the practical are less.
According to my opinion using vs /P is much accurate rather than the P vs
graph since the percentage errors are much lower in P vs graph relative to the
vs /P graph.
Discussion
Relative importance of the various parameters that affect buckling load
Most affective parameters for the buckling load are
o Length of the strut
According to the Euler equation we can see that the buckling load is
inversely proportional to the square of the length of the strut. Hence,
struts with higher length buckle more easily than the shorter length ones.
o End conditions
When both ends are fixed buckling load is higher than the both end
pinned or one end fixed struts. Also the point where the maximum
deflection occurs vary as it is in the middle of the both ends pinned and
fixed struts and 2/3rd from the pinned end in one end pinned strut.
o Cross section of strut
Since the Euler buckling load is proportional to the second moment of
area of the strut cross section variations affect it.
o Initial buckle of the strut
If there is an initial buckle it is possible to buckle towards that direction. In
this case buckling load is much lesser than a strut which does not have
an initial buckle.
o Youngs Modulus
Buckling load is proportional to the buckling load of the strut and a
material with a higher Youngs modulus will not get easily buckled.
Reasons for the differences between experimental and theoretical buckling
loads
Errors in Dial Gauge
Dial Gauge must be perpendicular to the strut. But during the practical, that
condition may not be satisfied completely. The dial gauge may be not at the
place where the maximum deflection occurs. Similarly friction forces inside
the dial gauge may affect the smaller values of the readings we get since the
relative error is high.
Initial error in the testing machine
Friction forces at the fixing point of the loading beam add up a large error to
the results because any force, which adds to the loading beam, will affect
FOUR times than its actual value.
Human errors
Human errors can be considered as an important factor. If the eye of the
person is not kept normal to the dial gauge it may cause a reading error.
When the load gets near to the buckling road dial gauge pointer start to
rotate rapidly and we must be very careful and precise at this point to get the
correct number of rounds Also we are drawing graphs to calculate values as
we do the drawings by free hand it may cause errors.
Initial deflection of the strut
We assume that the initial deflection to be sinusoidal. But if it is not it may
affect our graphs since the vs /P graph was drawn assuming this. Also
initially strut may have buckled at several points which may also reduce the
buckling load.
Cross section was not constant
The cross section may vary along the strut. But we assumed that it is
constant. So the experimental & theoretical values may differ.
Length is not exactly correct
Although the whole length was used to calculate the theoretical value, it is
not the correct length between the end conditions. We used a smaller length
to fix the strut to the machine, so that the length of strut cannot be taken as
the initial length.(Before fixing)
Errors due to assumptions
Following are the assumptions we made during the practical
o The compressive load is exactly axial and it passes through the
centroid of the column section.
o The material of the column is perfectly homogeneous and isotropic.
o Pin joints are frictionless and fixed ends are perfectly rigid.
o The weight of the column itself is negligible.
Sometimes these assumptions may not be as applicable as said due to
practical reasons
Practical situations we have to worry about the buckling of struts
Constructing bridges
A strut that is too slender for the applied forces may buckle. A great deal of
the mass in some bridges is present, not to withstand the applied forces,
but to prevent buckling. Large struts are often built as trusses, so that a
very large truss may include members that are themselves smaller trusses,
in order to improve the balance between stiffness and lightness. Because
struts have weight, they tend, however slightly, to sag. That is, they
experience bending moments. In theory they should be slightly curved, so
that the thrust passes exactly along their neutral axes, though because the
live loads can vary, the curvature can only be an approximation to the
correct amount.
Constructing buildings
When we build roofs for structures eave struts are used. Eave strut is a
structural piece spanning columns at the edge of a roof. Building authorities
give various methods to adopt upon the effective length, which is also
related to the buckling load of columns in any practical case.
The collapse of cylindrical shells under external pressure is known to be
controlled by global elastic buckling, material failure, or a combination.
The compression buckling of multi-layer elastomeric bearings, which are
widely used as vibration mounts, bridge bearings, and seismic isolators for
buildings.
The design of unbraced steel angle section beams against biaxial bending
and torsion requires the ability to predict their lateral buckling strengths
when bent about the major principal axis.
In aircraft wings with excessive torsional loading
In hulls of submarines
In flanges of I beams subjected to excessive and compressive loads
In rivets of I beams with a larger shear load
References
http://www.tech.plymouth.ac.uk/sme/desnotes/eulerderiv1.html
http://www.du.edu/~jcalvert/tech/techhom.htm#civil
http://www.roymech.co.uk/index3.htm
http://www.mech.uwa.edu.au/DANotes/buckling/home.html
