1) This experiment aimed to determine Young's modulus, verify rotational spring stiffness due to a crack, and locate a crack in a cantilever beam made of aluminum.
2) Deflection measurements were taken at two points on the beam with and without a crack under increasing loads. Crack location and size were calculated using the deflection increases.
3) Young's modulus was calculated as 65.386 GPa with 6.6% error from the actual value of 70 GPa. The crack location was determined as 545.53 mm with 3.1% error from the actual 529 mm. Rotational spring stiffness was calculated with 5.7% error.
1) This experiment aimed to determine Young's modulus, verify rotational spring stiffness due to a crack, and locate a crack in a cantilever beam made of aluminum.
2) Deflection measurements were taken at two points on the beam with and without a crack under increasing loads. Crack location and size were calculated using the deflection increases.
3) Young's modulus was calculated as 65.386 GPa with 6.6% error from the actual value of 70 GPa. The crack location was determined as 545.53 mm with 3.1% error from the actual 529 mm. Rotational spring stiffness was calculated with 5.7% error.
1) This experiment aimed to determine Young's modulus, verify rotational spring stiffness due to a crack, and locate a crack in a cantilever beam made of aluminum.
2) Deflection measurements were taken at two points on the beam with and without a crack under increasing loads. Crack location and size were calculated using the deflection increases.
3) Young's modulus was calculated as 65.386 GPa with 6.6% error from the actual value of 70 GPa. The crack location was determined as 545.53 mm with 3.1% error from the actual 529 mm. Rotational spring stiffness was calculated with 5.7% error.
1) This experiment aimed to determine Young's modulus, verify rotational spring stiffness due to a crack, and locate a crack in a cantilever beam made of aluminum.
2) Deflection measurements were taken at two points on the beam with and without a crack under increasing loads. Crack location and size were calculated using the deflection increases.
3) Young's modulus was calculated as 65.386 GPa with 6.6% error from the actual value of 70 GPa. The crack location was determined as 545.53 mm with 3.1% error from the actual 529 mm. Rotational spring stiffness was calculated with 5.7% error.
5 CRACK DETECTION IN UNIFORM RECTANGULARBEAM OBJECTIVE: 1) Determination of Young’s Modulus of material 2) Verification of rotational spring stiffness due to a crack. 3) Determination of the location and size of a crack in a cantilever beam.
THEORY:
EULER BERNOULLI BEAM THEORY: -
Assumptions: - a) Cross-sections that are plane & normal to the longitudinal axis remain plane and normal to it after deformation. b) Shear Deformations are neglected. c) Beam Deflections are small.
The displacement equation of a rectangular cantilever beam is
given by,
Figure 1
Where, y = Deflection at any point x from the free end W = Load at the free end E = Modulus of elasticity of the material I = Moment of Inertia of rectangular beam B = width of a rectangular beam h = height of the rectangular beam A crack in a beam induces local flexibility. This flexibility gives rise to a jump in the slope of a beam. The flexibility can be conveniently represented by introducing a massless rotational spring of stiffness Kt at the crack location. Using the principles of linear elastic fracture mechanics, it is possible to show that the stiffness is dependent on the crack size a, cross-sectional dimensions ‘b’and ‘h’ of the beam, and modulus of elasticity E of the material as follows.
Figure 2 a) Beam with Crack b) representation of crack by rotational
spring
If a cantilever beam is subjected to a load P at the free end, it will lead to
a smooth deflection curve with a deflection at the free end. If the same beam has acrack at a distance x from the free end, the deflection curve of segment x of the beam will have an extra rotation (M/Kt), where M=Px. Figure 3. Deflection of an un-cracked beam
A crack induces an extra slope in the deflection of the beam. The extra slope is given by assuming a torsion spring at the crack point. The extra rotation of a beamis (M/K) where M = P*x, at any distance x from the free end. The extra deflections at locations x1, and x2 from the free end are given by
By measuring the deflection increase at any two points and noting their positions from the free end, crack location x can be found by the formula.
a) Measure the dimensions of the cantilever beam using metric scale and Vernier Calliper. b) Mark the required length of the cantilever beam from one end and mount the beam by fixing the other end with C-Clamp. c) Two dial gauges are placed at distances of 135mm and 321mm from the free end to measure the deflection of the beam under load. d) Mark these locations and set the initial reading of dial gauges to zero. e) Load the cantilever by placing known masses starting from 50g to 550g in steps of 50g. Note the deflection at each step from the dial gauges. f) Unclamp the cantilever beam and introduce a transverse crack of size around half the depth of the beam at mid-span. The crack must begin from the top surface and terminate at the neutral plane. g) Repeat the above steps to obtain deflection data at the same points (in presence of the crack) for the same loading as the uncracked beam.
TEST SPECIMEN:
Rectangular Aluminum Bar
Dimensions: Length: 878 mm Width: 25 mm Height: 10 mm Observations and Results: Deflection at A (mm) Deflection at B (mm) Extra Extra Sr.No Weight(Kg) Cracked Uncracked deflection Cracked Uncracked deflection Beam Beam due to Beam Beam due to crack(D2) crack(D1) 1 0.05 0.52 0.34 0.18 0.32 0.21 0.11 2 0.1 1.34 1.05 0.29 0.85 0.68 0.17 3 0.15 2.11 1.89 0.22 1.35 1.21 0.14 4 0.2 2.9 2.49 0.41 1.83 1.60 0.23 5 0.25 3.55 3.04 0.51 2.24 1.95 0.29 6 0.3 3.98 3.71 0.27 2.51 2.38 0.13 7 0.35 4.76 4.31 0.45 3.00 2.77 0.23 8 0.4 5.39 4.98 0.41 3.4 3.20 0.20 9 0.45 6.35 5.97 0.38 4.01 3.85 0.16 10 0.5 6.9 6.27 0.63 4.37 4.03 0.34 11 0.55 7.5 7.03 0.47 4.74 4.53 0.21
Crack Rotation Stiffness Sr.No Weight(Kg) distance (Rad) (N/mm) X (mm)
1) Crack Location: - Average 𝛿A = 0.3836 mm Average 𝛿B = 0.2009 mm and XA = 135 mm , XB= 321 mm where XA and XB are the Locations of Dial gauges from the loading point 𝛿A/ 𝛿B = (X- XA)/(X- XB), where X is the crack location from Loading Point using the formula, we get X = 545.53 mm and actual X=529 mm Therefore, Error in X = ((545.53-529)/529)*100 = 3.124%
2) Young’s Modulus of the Beam Material (E): -
The young’s Modulus can be found out using the Strength of Materials approach. We have the closed form solution for the deflection of any point on the cantilever point under a point load at the end.
Following the above procedure, we get the value of E = 65.386 GPa
The actual value of E = 70GPa. Therefore, % error = ((70-65.386)/70)*100 = 6.591%
3) Torsional Spring Stiffness (Kt): -
Since, 𝛿A = 𝛿*(X – XA) & 𝛿 = M/K where 𝛿 is the jump in the slope due to notch. Kt using the actual crack location value = 2.733kNm/rad Kt using the determined value of crack location = 2.889kNm/rad Therefore, error in Kt = ((2.889-2.733)/2.733)*100 = 5.708% CONCLUSION:
1) The actual value of Young’s Modulus of aluminum is 70 GPa and the value we got comes out to be 65.386GPa. The value of the experimentally determined Young’s Modulus differs from the expected value due to some unavoidable errors. 2) Stiffness of a beam decreases due to the inclusion of a crack. 3) Superposition of self-weight and external load leads to an erroneous result.
