College of Engineering

School of Civil Engineering

ECS416: STATICS
ASSIGNMENT
Semester: MAC 2023 – JULY 2023

PN. NORISHAM BINTI IBRAHIM

Lecturer PN. SHAFIENAZ BINTI ISMAIL
TS. DR.-ING. ILYANI AKMAR BINTI ABU BAKAR
Programme CEEC222 : BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING (HONS.) CIVIL
Course ECS416 : STATICS
Credit
3.0 : 3 hours Lecture and 1 hour Tutorial
Hours
Project-Based Learning In Engineering
Evaluation Project : Mechanics: Inspection And Analysis of Beam 10%
Structure

1. INTRODUCTION TO THE ASSIGNMENT

This project provides a unique hands-on experience where the students need to participate
by working in the field on an existing structure. The general purpose of this project is to relate
the theory learned in the classroom with the real field work. Objectives of the project are as
follows.
i. To identify a real existing beam structure and differentiate between beams, support of
the beams, and loads applied to the beams.
ii. To collect the required data for the beam analysis.
iii. To model the beam in a modern tool/software.
iv. To analyze the beam using the selected tool and manual calculation
v. To obtain section properties, reaction force, shear force and bending moment values
and diagrams from the analyses.
vi. To compare the results obtained from both analyses.
vii. To identify the ‘high risk of failure’ location and explain a suitable solution by giving
proof of calculation (manually), to reduce the risk.
 College of Engineering
School of Civil Engineering

2. COURSE AND PROGRAMME OUTCOMES WITH COMPLEX

ENGINEERING PROBLEMS & KNOWLEDGE PROFILE

This project addresses two (2) course outcomes (CO) and two (2) programme outcomes (PO)
which are mapped to complex engineering problem characteristics (WP) and the required
knowledge profiles (WK) as shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Mapping of Course Outcomes (CO) - Programme Outcome (PO) - Complex

Engineering Problems (WP) & Knowledge Profile (WKs)
Course Programme Complex Engineering Knowledge Profile
Outcomes Outcome Problems (WP) (WKs)
CO1 - Apply the PO1: Apply knowledge of WP1 (Knowledge) - in-depth WK1 - A systematic,
principle of mathematics, natural engineering knowledge at the theorybased understanding of
mechanics to the science, engineering level of one or more of WK3, the natural sciences applicable
solution of fundamentals and an WK4, WK5, WK6 or WK8 to the discipline.
engineering engineering specialization which allows a fundamental
problems. to the solution of complex based, first principles WK2 - Conceptually-based
engineering problems. analytical approach. mathematics, numerical
analysis, statistics and formal
CO2 - Evaluate PO2: Identify, formulate, WP3 (Analysis) - no obvious aspects of computer and
engineering research literature and solution and require abstract information science to support
problems using analyse complex civil thinking, originality in analysis analysis and modelling
basic principles engineering problems to formulate suitable steel
applicable to the discipline.
of statics in a reaching substantiated design structural.
systematic and conclusions using first
logical manner. WK3 - A systematic,
principles of mathematics,
WP4 (Familiarity of issues) - theorybased formulation of
natural sciences and
infrequently encountered engineering fundamentals
engineering sciences.
issues related to real-life required in the engineering
engineering structures/projects discipline.
in engineering practices

3. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOAL (SDG)

The Statics course (ECS416) has been mapped to SDG 4; therefore, the design of this project
is geared towards achieving the target of SDG 4. The integration of this project with the SDG
is shown in Table 2.
 College of Engineering
School of Civil Engineering

Table 2: Integration of the projects with the SDGs

SDG 4 SDG 4 Target Project Strategy

Ensure inclusive and Students must apply fundamental/basic concepts to

equitable quality identify problems, analyse solutions, and evaluate
education and promote solutions for real world engineering structures, all of
lifelong learning which will foster students' lifelong learning while
opportunities for all. resolving their identified problems.

4. ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS

The project is a group work consists of 4 to 5 members in a group. It is an outdoor activity

which requires the students to select an actual beam structure to be analyzed. They will need
to identify and differentiate between beams, support of the beams, and loads applied to the
beams. The selected beam must bear load(s) in addition to its self-weight, which the student
needs to estimate based on appropriate shape, dimension, and material property.

The students must model the existing beam in any modern tool, such as StaadPro, Lusas or
other reliable online analysis tools. The idealization of the selected beam shall ideally
represent the real beam condition comprising geometrical (shape and dimension) and material
properties of the selected beam and applied loads. Types of supports may be assumed to fulfil
the condition of determinate structure. The model must be analyzed to produce section
properties (moment of inertia and radius of gyration) of the beam, reaction, shear force and
bending moment values and diagrams. All the results must be compared with manual
calculation. Each group also needs to identify the ‘high risk of failure’ location and explain a
suitable solution by giving proof of calculation (manually) to reduce the risk.

Hence, in this project, students are required to identify and estimate the dimension and loads
of an actual beam structure (WP1) using appropriate sources (WK8) and make rational
assumptions (WK3) if needed. Furthermore, students will need to perform an in-depth analysis
using both modern tool and manual calculation (WP3) to idealize and analyze the actual
structure with appropriate loads and support conditions and subsequently compare the results
obtained from modern tool and manual calculation (WP4). Both (modern and manual)
analyses must concern the section and material property, and load distribution before finding
reactions, internal shear, and moment. Finally, the students must compare the results of
section properties, reactions, shear force and bending moment (values and diagrams) by
applying the depth of knowledge on profile WP1 (WK3) engineering fundamental
 College of Engineering
School of Civil Engineering

(mathematics and physics) learned in Statics. In addition, each group also needs to identify
the ‘high risk of failure’ location and explain a suitable solution by giving proof of calculation
(manually), to reduce the risk.

A poster template that may be downloaded from the following URL

(https://tinyurl.com/ECS416-PosterTemplate) must be used to present all the work which
include
i) Photos of the real beam structure
ii) Photos of the field work
iii) Geometrical and material properties used in the manual calculation and to model
the beam structure in the modern tool.
iv) All calculations/equations/analysis/results (section properties, shear force and
bending moment diagrams) for and from manual calculation. Values for critical
points must be shown.
v) Steps and sequence to develop and analyze the model in the modern tool.
vi) Results of the analysis from both manual calculation and modern tool.
vii) Location of ‘high risk of failure’ and proof of calculation (manually), to reduce the
risk.

Submission of the assignment is carried out by compiling the assignment rubrics (as the
assignment cover) alongside the poster in .pdf format through google form (please login
using your UiTM email account) at the links as follows:

CLASS GROUP LINK

CEEC2223R2
CEEC2223R1
CEEC2223C2
CEEC2223C3 https://bit.ly/ProjectSubmissionECS416
CEEC2223C1
CEEC2223B1
CEEC2223B2

Only ONE SUBMISSION per group is allowed. Please follow the designated link to submit
your assignment. The submission due date is by Week 12, 22nd June 2023 (Thursday)
before 5.00 pm. Failure to comply with this requirement will automatically disqualify you from
getting the assignment marks.

END OF ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS

 ASSIGNMENT RUBRICS
ECS416 STATICS
Lecturers: DR NORISHAM BINTI IBRAHIM Class Group: CEEC220/EC220
*please circle
CEEC2223B1
Group No.:

Group members: Name Student ID

1) FARAHANA BINTI ABDUL RAZAK 2022916961

2)
NATRAH BINTI MUHAMMAD QAYYUM JEPRI 2022917619
3)
4) SITI NUR SALSABILLAH BINTI MUHAMMAD ALI TAN 2022947363
5) MUHAMMAD FARIS BIN MOHD ZUKIMAN 2022764321

Scale Low Developing Good Excellent Superior Subtotal

A Knowledge Base for Engineering: (CO1-PO1) 60 Marks
The students can demonstrate competence in university level
mathematics, natural sciences, engineering fundamentals.
Demonstrates a
Theory in Demonstrates Demonstrates some Demonstrates Demonstrates good
comprehensive
Engineering minimal or no ability ability to understand satisfactory ability to ability to understand
understanding of
Problems to understand the the application of understand the the application of
underlying theory
(Background of study application of theory theory to the application of theory theory to the
and application to the
& Objective) to the problem. problem. to the problem. problem.
problem.

25 marks (0-5 marks) (6-10 marks) (11-15 marks) (16-20 marks) (21-25 marks) /25

Describes Describes rationale Evaluates rationale

Attempts to describe
Assumptions used in Able to describe assumptions and assumptions and assumptions and
assumptions and
the analysis assumption and conceptualise used conceptualise with conceptualise with
conceptualize, but no
(Structural details) conceptualise. and elaborate the good justification the persuasive
elaborate the model.
model. model. justification.
25 marks (0-5 marks) (6-10 marks) (11-15 marks) (16-20 marks) (21-25 marks) /25
 Demonstrates Demonstrates
minimal creative Demonstrates some Demonstrates good excellent ability to
development ability to present 2 ability to present 2 present a
including some creative development essential comprehensive
Poster Presentation Describe at least one
knowledge. knowledge. development development with in-
creative development
Presentation is Presentation does knowledge. depth details and
and missing some
missing requirements not include one of Presentation has examples.
requirement.
and do not elaborate requirement and included essential Presentation is well
the model minimal elaborate information with good thought out and
the model. elaborate the model. visually appealing
the model.
10 marks (0-2 marks) (3-4 marks) (5-6 marks) (7-8 marks) (9-10 marks) /10
TOTAL /60

WP Scale Low Developing Good Excellent Superior Subtotal

Formulation & Analysis (CO2-PO2) 40 Marks
The students can identify, formulate and analyze the complex civil engineering problems using first principles of mathematics and engineering basis.
Demonstrates Demonstrates
Demonstrates
Able to satisfactory good
some ability to Demonstrates a
understand the ability to ability to
Analyse the understand the comprehensive
application of understand the understand the
problem using application of underlying theory
theory using application of application of
specified theory using using analysis of
analysis of theory using theory using
knowledge analysis of beams (shear
beams (shear analysis of analysis of
profile related beams (shear forces and
WP1 - Depth of forces and beams (shear beams (shear
with theory forces and bending moment
Knowledge bending moment forces and forces and
engineering bending moment diagrams) and
required diagrams) and bending moment bending moment
(WK1 – Natural diagrams) and with appropriate
(Methodology) with appropriate diagrams) and diagrams) and
sciences, WK2 – with appropriate section
section with appropriate with appropriate
Mathematics, section properties to
properties to section section
WK3 – properties to solve a real
solve real properties to properties to
Engineering solve real structure by
structure by solve real solve real
fundamentals) structure by addressing 3
addressing 2 structure by structure by
addressing 2 WKs.
WKs. addressing 3 addressing 3
WKs.
WKs. WKs.
15 marks (0-3 marks) (4-6 marks) (7-9 marks) (10-12 marks) (13-15 marks) /15
 Develop 2 Develop more
Able to show 1 Develop 3
Identify analysis procedure/ration than 3
procedure/ration procedure/ration
practically, al assumption procedure/ration
WP3 - Able to show 1 al assumption al assumption
efficient and with al assumption
Depth of analysis procedure/ration with acceptable with good
effectiveness in satisfactory with excellent
(Methodology) al assumption persuasive persuasive /15
determine the persuasive persuasive
using suitable judgement to judgement to
stress and judgement to judgement to
modern analysis solve problem solve problem
deflection in the solve problem solve problem
tool. using suitable using suitable
usage of modern using suitable using suitable
modern analysis modern analysis
analysis tools modern analysis modern analysis
tool. tool.
tool. tool.
15 marks (0-3 marks) (4-6 marks) (7-9 marks) (10-12 marks) (13-15 marks)
Able to identify
Able to identify Able to identify
Select Able to identify 1 and solve the 1
and solve the 1 and solve the 2
WP4 - formula/procedur infrequently infrequently
infrequently infrequently
Familiarity of es to resolve encountered encountered
Able to validate encountered encountered
issues (Results, infrequently issue during the issue during the
the analysis with issue during the issue during the
Discussion & encountered analysis and analysis and
comparison analysis and analysis and
Conclusion) verification validate the satisfactorily
greater than 40% validate the effectively
issues using analysis with validate the
error. analysis validate the /10
software and comparison less analysis with
10 marks comparison less analysis with
manual than 30-40% comparison less
than 20-30% comparison less
calculation error. than 10-20%
error. than 10% error.
error.
(0-2 marks) (3-4 marks) (5-6 marks) (7-8 marks) (9-10 marks)
TOTAL /40
 inspection and analysis of beam
structure
INTRODUCTION
Beam analysis is a fundamental aspect of structural
BEAM,SLAB,UDL
engineering and is employed to study the behaviour of beams CALCULATION
Self-weight concrete: 25kN/m3
under various loading conditions. Beams are structural
Beam’s length: 5.64m
elements that are commonly used to support loads and
Beam’s width: 0.55m
transfer them to the underlying supports, such as columns
Beam’s height: 0.43m
or walls. They are characterized by their length, cross-
Beam’s UDL: 24kN/m3 x 0.55m x 0.43m = 5.676kN/m
sectional shape, and material properties. The analysis of
Slab’s length: 5.64m
beams involves determining the internal forces and
Slab’s width: 1.68m/2=0.84m
deformations experienced by the beam due to applied loads.
Slab’s height: 0.25m
These internal forces include shear forces, bending moments,
Slab’s UDL: 24kNm3 x 0.84m x 0.25m = 5.04kN/m
and axial forces, which arise as a result of external loads,
Δ UDL: Beam’s UDL + Slab’s UDL = 5.676kN/m + 5.04kN/m = 10.716kN/m
such as dead loads, live loads, and environmental factors.

Area of unit, A (m2):

Area of top flange + area of bottom flange + area of web
OBJECTIVES = (0.1339 x 0.0096)m2 x (0.1876 x 0.0064)m2 x (0.1339 x 0.0096)m2
= 0.00377152
To identify a real existing beam structure and
differentiate between beams, support of the beams,
and loads applied to the beams.
To collect the required data for the beam analysis.
To model the beam in a modern tool/software. SHEAR FORCE AND
To analyse the beam using the selected tool and BENDING MOMENT,
Ƹfx = 0,
manual calculation
To obtain section properties, reaction force, shear RBX = 0
MANUAL VS MODERN
force and bending moment values and diagrams from Ƹfy = 0 TOOL
the analyses. RAY + RBY – 10.716 (5.64) = 0
To compare the results obtained from both analyses. RAY + RBY – 60.44 = 0 RAY + RBY = 60.44N
To identify the ‘high risk of failure’ location and ƸMB = 0 = 10.716
explain a suitable solution by giving proof of calculation (5.64)( 5.64/2) – RAY (5.64) = 0 170.44 – (5.64) RAY = 0
(manually), to reduce the risk. RAY = 30.22KN
RAY + RBY = 60.44
30.22 + RBY = 60.44
SECTION AB 0 ≤x < 5.64m

RBY = 30.22KN Ƹfy = 0

Moment of Inertia X-Axis, Ix (m4): 30.22 – 10.716 (x) – Vx = 0
(bh^3)/12 30.22 – 10.716x = Vx
〖 〗 〖 〗
=(0.1339 ( 0.2068) ^3)/12- ((0.1339-0.0064) ( 0.1876) ^3)/12
= 0.0000285349
Moment of Inertia Y-Axis, Iy (m4): ƸMx = 0
(hb^3)/12 -30.22(x) + 10.716(x)(x/2) + Mx = 0
For section 1, 30.22x – 5.36x^2 = Mx
〖 〗
= (0.0096 ( 0.1339) ^3)/12-(0.00128)(0)
= 0.00000192057
For section 2,
〖 〗
= (0.1876 ( 0.0064) ^3)/12-(0.00120)(0)
= 0.00000040981 RISK OF FAILURE
For section 3,
〖 〗
= (0.0096 ( 0.1339) ^3)/12-(0.00128)(0) Ƹfx = 0, AX= 0
= 0.00000192057 Ƹfy = 0
ΔIy (m4) = 0.00000192057 + 0.00000040981 + 0.00000192057 =
AY + BY – 10.716 (2.82) = 0
0.00000384252
AY + BY – 30.22 = 0
Radius of Gyration X-Axis, rx (m):
√ ∆ SECTION OF
√
(I_x/ A)
= ((0.0000285349 )/0.00377152) PROPERTIES
RAY + RBY = 30.22KN
SECTION AB 0 ≤ x < 2.82m
= 0.08698 ƸMA = 0 Ƹfy = 0
Radius of Gyration Y-Axis, ry (m):
BY(2.82)-10.716(2.82)(2.82/2) = 0 15.11– 10.716 (x) – Vx = 0
√ ∆
(I_y/ A) 15.11 – 10.716x = Vx
√
= ((0.00000384252 )/0.00377152)
2.82BY-42.61=0
BY=15.11KN
= 0.03192
ƸMx = 0
AY + BY=30.22 -15.11(x) + 10.716(x)(x/2) + Mx = 0
AY + 15.11= 30.22 15.11x – 5.358x^2 = Mx

DISCUSSION AY = 15.11KN
Measurement Errors: Errors in the measurement of
beam dimensions or deflections can arise due to
instrumental limitations, calibration issues, or human
errors.
FIELD WORK PROVEN
Instrumentation Errors: Problems with the instruments
used to measure forces, displacements, or strains can
introduce errors into the experimental data.
Personal error: observation and calculation with
wrong method or lack of experience. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, this study successfully achieved its objectives of identifying the beam structure,
collecting data, conducting analysis using modern software and manual calculations, obtaining
relevant values and diagrams, comparing the results, and addressing a high-risk failure location.
The analysis results and proposed solution provide valuable insights for understanding the
behavior of the beam structure and ensuring its structural integrity and safety.