e-LAB 4 : BUCKLING OF STRUTS

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

2.0 LEARNING OUTCOME

1. The application the engineering knowledge in practical application

2. To enhance technical competency in structural engineering throughlaboratory
application.
3. To communicate effectively in group
4. To identify problem, solving and finding out appropriate solution throughlaboratory
application

3.0 INTRODUCTION
1. 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 materials crushing.
2. 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

1. To predict the buckling load Euler buckling formula is used. The crictical 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).
2. The Euler formula become inaccurate for struts with L/K ratio of less than1.125 and this
should be taken into account in any design work.
 • Euler buckling formula for pin struts :

P =  2EI L2
e
Where;
Pe = Euler buckling load (N)
E = Young’s Modulus (Nm-2)
I = Second moment of area (m4)
L = length of strut (m)

5.0 APPARATUS

Figure 1Buckling of struts apparatus

Figure 2 Torx Pin

Figure 3 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
3ransmi provided and calculated the second moment of area, I,for the strut. ( bd3/12)
2. 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 3ransm of travel available on the
handwheel threat to compress the strut. Finally tighten the locking screw.
3. Carefully back- off the handwheel so that the strut is resting in the notch but not
3ransmitting any load. Rezero the forcemeter using the front panel control.
4. 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 with the straightness of
strut). Turn the handwheel until there is no further increase in load (the load may peak
and then drop as it settles in the notches).
5. Record the final load in Table 1. Repeat with strut numbers 2, 3, 4and 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 struts.
3. 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 values of 1/L2.
4. Enter the result into Table 3

7.0 RESULT

1.Pinned-pinned

Strut Number Length Buckling Load (N) Buckling Load (N)

(mm) (mm) Experiment Theory
1 320 -108 61.39
2 370 -28 45.92
3 420 -22 35.63

Table 1
2.Fined-pinned
Strut Number Length Buckling Buckling Load (N) 1/𝐿2 (𝑚−2
(mm) Load Theory
(N)
1 320 -194 122.764 9.77
2 370 -104 91.826 7.30
3 420 -71 71.264 5.67

Table 2

3.Fined-fixed
Strut Number Length Buckling Buckling Load (N) 1/𝐿2 (𝑚−2
(mm) Load Theory
(N)
1 320 -339 245.537 9.77
2 370 -124 183.659 7.30
3 420 -74 142.534 5.67

Table 3
9.0 Discussion
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.

Pe =  2EI L2
Based Eular formula and Table 1, 2 and 3,
Pe = Euler buckling load (N), L = length

We may assume that Pe will be lower for larger L values, indicating an inversely proportional
relationship under a linear condition between the buckling load and the strut's length.

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

Show on Table 1 using formula: Pe =  2EI L2

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.

Graph plotted = In the graph paper.

Base on the graft that we plotted, the difference to the end of the pins for the results of gradient
experiments is 13.51 and the slope of the theoretical calculation results of 6.28. Difference to the fixed -
pin end of the gradient experiment results was 30 and gradient theory results of the calculation is 12.56. In
addition, the differences for fixed-fixed end conditions are for the gradient experiment results are 64.63
and theoretical calculations are the result of the slope is 25.12. 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.

Because the ratio of the buckling load (N) to the 1/L² (m) remains consistent throughout the
graft, the Euler Formula can reliably forecast the buckling load. It also shows that the buckling
load is inversely related to the length, therefore when the length is 0, the buckling load should
be 0.
Part 2

1.Plot separate graphs of buckling load versus 1/ L2 and calculate thegradient of each line.

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

Pinned- Fixed- Fixed-

pinned pinned fixed
Experiment 13.51 30 64.63
gradient
Experimental 13.51/13.51 30/13.51 64.63/13.51
ratio =1 = 2.22 = 4.78
Theoretical 6.28/6.28 12.56/6.28 25.12/6.28
ratio =1 =2 =4

3.Comment on the experimental and theoretical ratio.

Since the experimental ratio in the table does not match the connection end usage, we may infer
that, according to the theoretical ratio value, the fixed end is substantially stronger than the pin
end. This demonstrates that, in contrast to a pin-pin connection, greater force should be applied
to the members of the joint fixed-fixed end. The ratio is twice as great as the pinned-pinned
instance when one of the ends is changed from pin end to fix end; the same thing happened when
both ends were changed to fixed-fixed end. The experimental ratio does not match the theoretical
ratio due to a number of mistakes made during the experiment, including improperly tightening
the screw and improperly tightening the sliding crosshead.

4.What conclusion can you made from the experiments.

Based on the Buckling of Strut experiment, we can conclude that the Fixed end is much stronger
than the Pinned end and that the member of the joint fixed-fixed end connection should be
subjected to greater force. However, in terms of other criteria, the Pinned end is used for Steel
connections because, as fixed end connections are typically permanent, Steel always uses bolt
and nut rather than weld fabricating connection.
10. CONCLUSION
We can conclude from the Buckling of Strut experiment that Fixed ends are much stronger than
Pinned ends, and that the member of the joint fixed-fixed end connection should be subjected to
greater force. However, other criteria typically apply to concrete beam or column connections
when using fixed end connections. Because a fixed end connection is often employed for a
permanent connection, the pinned end is utilized for steel connections.