1.

OBJECTIVE
1.1
To examine how shear force varies with an increasing point load.
1.2
To examine how shear force varies at the cut position of the beam for various
loading condition.

2.0

LEARNING OUTCOME
2.1
The application the engineering knowledge in practical application.
2.2
To enhance technical competency in structural engineering through laboratory
application.
To communicate effectively in group.
To identify problem, solving and finding out appropriate solution through

2.3
2.4

laboratory application.

3.0

INTRODUCTION
A compressive member can fail in two ways. The first is via rupture due to the
direct stress and the second is by an elastic mode of failure called buckling. Short

wide compressive member tends to fail by material crushing.

When buckling occurs the strut will no longer carry any more load and it will
simply continue to buckle i.e its stiffness then becomes zero and it is useless as a
structural member.

4.0

THEORY
To predict the buckling load Euler buckling formula is used. The critical value in
Euler Formula is the slenderness ratio, which is the ratio of the length of the strut

to its radius of gyration (L/K).

The Euler formula become inaccurate for struts with L/K ratio of less than 1.125
and this should be taken into account in any design work.

Euler buckling formula for pin struts:

Pe = 2 EI / L2
Where;
Pe = Euler buckling load (N)
E = Youngs Modulus (Nm-2)
I = Second moment of are (m4)
L = Length of strut (m)

5.0

APPARATUS

Buckling of Struts

Digital Display Force

Aluminum Struts
6.0

PROCEDURE
Part 1
1.
Fit the bottom chuck to the machine and remove the top chuck (to give
two pinned ends). Select the shortest strut, number 1, and measured the
cross section using the vernier provided and calculated the second moment
2.

of area, I,for the strut. (bd3/12)

Adjust the position of the sliding crosshead to accept the strut using the
thumbnut to lock off the slider. Ensure that there is the maximum amount
of travel available on the hand wheel threat to compress the strut. Finally

3.

tighten the locking screw.

Carefully back- off the handwheel so that the strut is resting in the notch
but not transmitting any load. Rezero the forcemeter using the front panel

4.

control.
Carefully start to load the strut. If the strut begin to buckle to the left,
flick the strut to the right and vice versa (this reduces any error
associated wih the straightness of strut). Turn the hand wheel until there is
no further increase in load (the load may peak and then drop as it settles in

5.

the notches).
Record the final load in Table 1. Repeat with strut numbers 2, 3, 4 and 5
adjusting the crosshead as required to fit the strut.

Part 2
1.
To study the effect of end conditions, follow the same basic procedure as
in part 1, but this time remove the bottom chuck and clamp the specimen
using the cap head screw and plate to make a pinned-fixed end condition.

2.

Record your result in Table 2 and calculate the values of 1/ L2 for the

3.

struts.
Fit the top chuck with the two cap head screws and clamp both ends of the
specimen to make a pinned pinned end condition. Calculate the new

4.

values of 1/L2.
Enter the result into Table 3

7.0

RESULTS

Strut
Number
1
2
3
4
5

Length
(mm)
320
370
420
470
520

Buckling Load (N) Buckling Load (N) 1/L2 ( m-2)

Experiment
Theory
9.77
-61
88.65
-47
66.31
7.30
-44
51.46
5.67
-22
41.09
4.53
-17
33.57
3.70

Table 1

Strut
Number
1
2
3
4
5

Length
(mm)
320
370
420
470
520

Buckling Load
(N)
-300
-255
-175
-137
-84

Buckling Load (N) 1/L2 ( m-2)

Theory
177.30
9.77
132.62
7.30
102.92
5.67
82.19
4.53
67.14
3.70

Table 2

Strut
Number
1
2
3
4
5

Length
(mm)
320
370
420
470
520

Buckling Load
(N)
-318
-255
-188
-153
-88

Table 3

Buckling Load (N) 1/L2 ( m-2)

Theory
354.60
9.77
265.24
7.30
205.85
5.67
164.38
4.53
134.29
3.70

8.0

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

I=

b d3
12

I=

(0.02)(0.002)3
12

I =13.33 x 1012
Buckling Load (N) Theory
2

Pe = EI/L (Pined-Pined)
2 ( 69 x 109 ) ( 13.33 x 1012 )
0.322
= 88.65 N
2

Pe = 2 EI/L (Pined-Fixed)
2 2 ( 69 x 109 ) ( 13.33 x 1012 )
0.322
= 177.30 N
2

Pe = 4 EI/L (Fixed-Fixed)
4 2 ( 69 x 109 ) ( 13.33 x 1012 )
0.322
= 354.60 N

8.1

Part 1
1.
Examine the Euler buckling equation and select an appropriate parameter
to establish a linear relationship between the buckling load and the length
of the strut. Write the relationship below.
2
2
Pe = EI/L
When L is increase, Pe will be decrease. Relation between buckling
load and the length of the strut is inversely proportional in linear
condition.

2.

Calculate the value and enter them in Table 1 with an appropriate title.

3.

Plot a graph to prove the relationship is linear. Compare your experimental

value to those calculated from Euler formula by entering a theoretical line
onto the graph. Comment on the result.
Base on the graft, the differences to the end of the pins for the
results of gradient experiments is 0.22 and the slope of the theoretical
calculation results of 0.55. Difference to the fixed -pin end of the gradient
experiment results were 1.08 and gradient theory results of the calculation
is 0.55. In addition, the differences for fixed-fixed end conditions are for
the gradient experiment results are 1.15 and theoretical calculations are
the result of the slope is 1.10. This experiment result shows that the slope
is greater than the slope of the calculation results. In practice, the
buckling of the experiment is higher than theoretical.

4.

Explain that the Euler Formula can predict the buckling load or not.
Euler Formula can predict the buckling load, because the ratio
between the Buckling Load (N) and the 1/L (m) is consistence within the
graft, and show accurately that inversely proportional as approve at point
(0,0) when the length is 0, then the buckling Load should be 0.

8.2

Part 2
1.

Plot separate graphs of buckling load versus 1/ L 2 and calculate the

gradient of each line.
Refer to Graph Paper.
Gradient is plotted in the graph.

2.

Fill the table below showing the comparison between experimental and
theoretical ratio by end condition.
Pinned-Pinned

Pinned-Fixed

Fixed-Fixed

Experimental
Gradient

0.22

1.08

1.15

Experimental
Ratio

0.22/0.22 = 1

Theoretical
Ratio

0.55/0.55=1

1.08/0.22 = 4.91 1.15/0.22 = 0.93

0.55/0.55 = 1

1.10/0.55 = 2

Notes:
1. *Use the experimental gradient from Part 1
2. Experiment ratio = Exp. Gradient / gradient of pinned-pinned.
3. Theoretical ratio can be obtained from Euler Formula for
pinned-fixed and fixed-fixed.

3.

Comment on the experimental and theoretical ratio.

From the table, experimental ratio is not consistence with the
usage of end of connection, we basically we know that the fixed end is
much stronger than the pins end as per theoretical ratio value. This shows
the more force should be imposed on the members of the joint fixed-fixed
end compared to the pin-pin connection. When one of the end is changed
from pin end to fix end, the ratio is two times larger than the pinned-

pinned, it the same case happed when both of the end changed to Fixedfixed end. The experimental ratio is not consistence with theoretical ratio
because there was several errors when conduct the experiment, such as
the screw is not tightens carefully, the sliding crosshead are not tighten to
the experiment apparatus.
4.

What conclusion can you made from the experiments

Based from the experiment of Buckling of Strut, we can conclude
that Fixed end were much stronger than the Pinned end and more force
should be imposed on the member of the joint fixed-fixed end connection,
but in other criteria the usage in fixed end connection usually apply for
concrete beam or column connection. The Pinned end is used for Steel
connection because it is usually fixed end connection is for permanent
connection.