International Journal of Advance Research in Engineering, Science & Technology(IJAREST),

ISSN(O):2393-9877, ISSN(P): 2394-2444,

Volume 2, Issue 3, March- 2015

Experimental verification of deflection of beam using theoretical and numerical

approach
Biltu Mahato1, Anil2, Harish H.V3
1, 2
Pre-final Year Undergraduate Students Department of Aeronautical Engineering, NMIT Bangalore, mbiltu.777@gmail.com
3
Assistant Professor Department of Aeronautical Engineering, NMIT Bangalore, harris.mech94@gmail.com

Abstract

This study investigates the maximum deflection of simply supported beam and cantilever beam under point loading. Experiments
on these beams have been carried out and maximum deflection has been noted. The experiment has been carried out for different
loads. The results obtained have been validated through theoretical and numerical approach. Numerical approach includes
mathematical and simulation approach. EulerBernoulli beam equation is considered for theoretical, finite element methods
(FEM) for mathematical and ANSYS 14.0 for simulation approach. The results obtained through theoretical, FEM and simulation
is very near to experimental results.

Keywords: Simply supported beam, Cantilever beam, Maximum deflection, FEM, ANSYS

I. INTRODUCTION The nonlinear material and geometrical analysis based on

A beam is a member subjected to loads applied transverse to
the long dimension, causing the member to bend. A beam
which is fixed at one end and free at other end is known as
cantilever beam. Simply supported beam is a beam
supported or resting freely on the supports at its both ends.
The deflection distance of a beam under a load is directly
related to the slope of the deflected shape of the member
under the load. It can be calculated by integrating the
function that mathematically describes the slope of the
member under that load. Deflection can be calculated by
standard formula calculated using EulerBernoulli beam
equation, virtual work, direct integration, Castigliones
method and Macaulay's method or the direct stiffness
method.
Gargi Majumder et al [1] have conducted finite element
analysis of the beam considering various types of elements
under different loading conditions in ANSYS 11.0. The
various numerical results were generated at different nodal
points by taking the origin of the Cartesian coordinate
system at the fixed end of the beam. The nodal solutions
were analyzed and compared. On comparing the
computational and analytical solutions it was found that for
stresses the 8 node brick element gives the most consistent
results and the variation with the analytical results is
minimum.
Amer M. Ibrahim et al [2] have described a nonlinear finite
element analyses which have been carried out to investigate
the behavior up to failure of simply supported composite
steel-concrete beams with external pre-stressing, in which a
concrete slab is connected together with steel I-beam by
means of headed stud shear connectors, subjected to
symmetrically static loading. ANSYS computer program
(version 12.0) has been used to analyze the three
dimensional model. They studied load deflection behavior,
strain in concrete, strain in steel beam and failure modes.
All Rights Reserved, @IJAREST-2015
Incremental-Iterative load method, is adopted. Three models
have been analyzed to verify its capability and efficiency.
The results obtained by finite element solutions have shown
good agreement with experimental results.
From literature survey, we identified that theoretical and
ANSYS simulations have only been carried out. Further in
this study we have taken FEM as a mathematical approach
to validate the results. In this approach we have considered
global stiffness matrix to find the maximum deflection [3].
Along with this EulerBernoulli beam equation is
considered for theoretical validation [47] and ANSYS
14.0 workbench for simulation [8, 9].
II. METHODOLOGY
The experiment and validation processes have been carried
out in two steps. For experiment, beam deflection test rig
setup was made as shown in figure 1 and figure 2. Steel
beam with rectangular cross section was used. Maximum
deflection was measured at different locations for different
loading varying from 0.2 Kg to 1.0 Kg. The corresponding
deflection was noted at loading and unloading condition
with the help of digital dial gauge for all setup of beam. All
experiment was repeated for various numbers of times at
different time and conditions. The setup and condition
giving minimum percentage error is considered here for
validation.
III. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND
RESULTS
The specifications of beam experimental setup are given in
table 1.
1
International Journal of Advance Research in Engineering, Science & Technology(IJAREST),
ISSN(O):2393-9877, ISSN(P): 2394-2444,
Volume 2, Issue 3, March- 2015
Table 1. Specifications of Experimental Setup

Parameters Dimensions
Material Steel
Young's Modulus 2.1*105 N/mm2
Thickness 5 mm
Breadth 25 mm
Length 600 mm
Moment of Inertia 260.41667 mm4

Figure 2. Cantilever beam experimental setup

The experimental results obtained for simply supported and

cantilever beam at different load are presented in the table 2,
3 and 4.

Table 2. Experimental results for simply supported beam

SI No. Load in Kg Maximum deflection in mm

1. 0.2 0.17
Figure 1. Simply supported beam experimental setup 2. 0.4 0.33
3. 0.6 0.51
4. 0.8 0.68
5. 1.0 0.86

Table 3. Experimental results for cantilever beam with

center load

SI No. Load in Kg Maximum deflection in mm

1. 0.2 0.77
2. 0.4 1.54
3. 0.6 2.35
4. 0.8 3.36
5. 1.0 4.23

Table 4. Experimental results for cantilever beam with end

load

SI No. Load in Kg Maximum deflection in mm

1. 0.2 2.63
2. 0.4 5.07
3. 0.6 8.12

All Rights Reserved, @IJAREST-2015

2
International Journal of Advance Research in Engineering, Science & Technology(IJAREST),
ISSN(O):2393-9877, ISSN(P): 2394-2444,
Volume 2, Issue 3, March- 2015
4. 0.8 10.83 Figure 4. Schematic representation of cantilever beam at
5. 1.0 13.44 center load

For cantilever beam with end loading as shown in figure 5

IV. VALIDATION we get
Validation of the above experimental results was done by
y= (4)
two approaches. They are:

4.1. Theoretical Approach

First uniform rectangular cross-sectional beams of linear

elastic isotropic homogeneous material have been
considered. The beam is taken mass-less and inextensible
hence have developed no strains. It is subjected to a vertical
point load at the tip of its free end and centre [36].
Figure 5. Schematic representation of cantilever beam at
Using the Bernoulli-Eulers elastic curve equation [3] the end load
following relationship is obtained:

EI (d2 y/dx2) =M (1) 4.2. Numerical Approach

Where E is modulus of elasticity which is of constant value,
I is moment of inertia=bh3 /12, b=width of beam, h=height
or thickness of beam, y=deflection due to loading, M=
moment due to applied force.
4.2.1. Mathematical validation
Mathematical validation means validation using FEM. In this
approach we use global stiffness equation to get the
deflection at the nodes [3].

On solving and applying boundary condition on equation (1)

{f} = [K] {q} (5)
for simply supported beam as shown in figure 3 we get

y= (2) Where {f} is force vector = {F1 M1 F2 M2 ... Fn Mn} T [K],

Where W=Force applied on the beam, L=Length of the ,
is stiffness matrix {q} is displacement vector = {q1 1 q2
T
beam. 2 ... qn n} , n = number of nodes, F1Fn is force at node
1n, M1Mn is moment due to applied force at node 1n,
q1 qn is linear deflection at nodes 1n, 1 n is angular
deflection.

4.2.2. Simulation

Simulation has been performed using ANSYS 14.0

workbench tool [8, 9].

Figure 3. Schematic representation of simply supported V. RESULTS AND DISSCUSSIONS

beam
The results obtained from validation approach are shown in
For cantilever beam with centered loading as shown in table 6, 7 and 8 for simply supported and cantilever beam
figure 4 we get for centre and end loading respectively. Figure 6 to figure 21
shows the results obtained using ANSYS simulation.
y= (3) Similarly all the values obtained from experimental,
theoretical, mathematical and simulation are plotted in load
vs. deflection graph as shown in figure 21, 22 and 23.

Table 5. Validation Results for Simply Supported Beam

SI No. Load in Kg Maximum deflection in mm

Theoretical Mathematical Simulation
1. 0.2 0.1614 0.1614 0.1615
2. 0.4 0.3229 0.3229 0.3231
3. 0.6 0.4843 0.4843 0.4829
4. 0.8 0.6458 0.6458 0.6461

All Rights Reserved, @IJAREST-2015

3
International Journal of Advance Research in Engineering, Science & Technology(IJAREST),
ISSN(O):2393-9877, ISSN(P): 2394-2444,
Volume 2, Issue 3, March- 2015
5. 1.0 0.8072 0.8072 0.8076

Table 6. Validation Results for Cantilever Beam with

Center Loading

SI No. Load in Kg Maximum deflection in mm

Theoretical Mathematical Simulation
1. 0.2 0.8072 0.8072 0.7996
2. 0.4 1.6144 1.6144 1.5991
3. 0.6 2.4217 2.4217 2.3987
4. 0.8 3.2289 3.2289 3.1983
5. 1.0 4.0361 4.0361 3.9978

Table 7. Validation Results for Cantilever Beam with End

Loading

SI No. Load in Kg Maximum deflection in mm

Theoretical Mathematical Simulation
1. 0.2 2.5831 2.5831 2.6972
2. 0.4 5.1662 5.1662 5.1393
3. 0.6 7.7493 7.7493 7.7031
4. 0.8 10.3325 10.3325 10.2710
5. 1.0 12.9156 12.9156 12.8380 Figure 7. Deflection of simply supported beam at 0.4 Kg
load

Figure 8. Deflection of simply supported beam at 0.6 Kg

load
Figure 6. Deflection of simply supported beam at 0.2 Kg
load

All Rights Reserved, @IJAREST-2015

4
International Journal of Advance Research in Engineering, Science & Technology(IJAREST),
ISSN(O):2393-9877, ISSN(P): 2394-2444,
Volume 2, Issue 3, March- 2015

Figure 9. Deflection of simply supported beam at 0.8 Kg Figure 11. Deflection of cantilever beam with 0.2 Kg load at
load center

Figure 10. Deflection of simply supported beam at 1.0 Kg Figure 12. Deflection of cantilever beam with 0.4 Kg load at
load center

All Rights Reserved, @IJAREST-2015

5
International Journal of Advance Research in Engineering, Science & Technology(IJAREST),
ISSN(O):2393-9877, ISSN(P): 2394-2444,
Volume 2, Issue 3, March- 2015

Figure 13. Deflection of cantilever beam with 0.6 Kg load at Figure 15. Deflection of cantilever beam with 1.0 Kg load at
center center

Figure 16. Deflection of cantilever beam with 0.2 Kg load at

Figure 14. Deflection of cantilever beam with 0.8 Kg load at end
center

All Rights Reserved, @IJAREST-2015

6
International Journal of Advance Research in Engineering, Science & Technology(IJAREST),
ISSN(O):2393-9877, ISSN(P): 2394-2444,
Volume 2, Issue 3, March- 2015

Figure 17. Deflection of cantilever beam with 0.4 Kg load at Figure 19. Deflection of cantilever beam with 0.8 Kg load at
end end

Figure 18. Deflection of cantilever beam with 0.6 Kg load at

end
Figure 20. Deflection of cantilever beam with 1.0 Kg load at
end

All Rights Reserved, @IJAREST-2015

7
International Journal of Advance Research in Engineering, Science & Technology(IJAREST),
ISSN(O):2393-9877, ISSN(P): 2394-2444,
Volume 2, Issue 3, March- 2015
Experimental Experimental
Theoretical
Theoretical Mathematical
Simulation
1 16
0.9
14
0.8
12
0.7
Deflection in mm

Deflection in mm
0.6 10

0.5 8
0.4
6
0.3
4
0.2
0.1 2

0 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Load in Kg Load in Kg

Figure 21. Load vs. deflection graph for simply supported Figure 22. Load vs. deflection graph for cantilever beam
beam with end load

VI. CONCLUSION
Experimental
Theoretical From above validation results, experimental results have
Mathematical been validated where maximum deflection profiles are
Simulation clearly matching. There is a good agreement between the
experimental, theoretical and numerical approach results for
4.5 maximum deflection. Although there are some small
discrepancies due to some experimental imperfection,
4 effects of temperature, creep and shrinkage. The final result
3.5 shows an error of around 7% for simply supported beam and
around 5% error for cantilever beam. Though FEM is an
approximation method its results are exactly matching with
Deflection in mm

3
the theoretical results whereas structural analysis using
2.5 ANSYS 14.0 gives result with an error of less than 1%.
2 Further from load vs. deflection graph it was clearly
observed that deflection was more in experimental results
1.5
when compared to that of the theoretical and numerical
1 approach results. As the error is within acceptable range we
conclude that FEM and ANSYS simulation tool that can be
0.5 used in the future for structural analysis.

0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
The authors want to acknowledge the department of
Load in Kg
aeronautical engineering, Nitte Meenakshi Institute of
technology, Bangalore for providing the technical support
Figure 21. Load vs. deflection graph for cantilever beam regarding the experimental setup and the faculties like Dr.
with center load Vivek Sanghi, Srikant H.V., Mahendra M.A., and Nishant
Deshai for their proper guidance.

All Rights Reserved, @IJAREST-2015

8
International Journal of Advance Research in Engineering, Science & Technology(IJAREST),
ISSN(O):2393-9877, ISSN(P): 2394-2444,
Volume 2, Issue 3, March- 2015
REFERANCES

[1] Gargi Majumder; Kaushik Kumar, Deflection and Stress

Analysis of a Cantilever and its Validation Using
ANSYS. International Journal of Mechanical
Engineering and Research, 2013, ISSN 2249-0019,
Volume 3, Number 6, pp. 655-662.
[2] Amer M. Ibrahim; Saad k. Mohaisen; Qusay W. Ahmed,
Finite element modeling of composite steel-concrete
beams with external prestressing. International Journal of
Civil and Structural Engineering Volume 3, No 1, 2012.
[3] S. B. Halesh, Finite Element Methods, 1st edition, Sapna
Book House, Jan. 2014, pp.311-364.
[4] Dr. R. K. Bansal, A textbook of Strength of Material
(Mechanics of Solids), 5th edition, Laxmi Publication,
2013, pp.515-582.
[5] Timoshenko, S.P. and D.H. Young. Elements of Strength
of Materials, 5th edition. (MKS System).
[6] E.A. Witmer (1991-1992). "Elementary Bernoulli-Euler
Beam Theory". MIT
[7] Unified Engineering Course Notes.Ballarini, Roberto,
"The Da Vinci-Euler-Bernoulli Beam Theory?".
Mechanical Engineering Magazine Online. Retrieved
2006-07-22, April 18, 2003.
[8] ANSYS 14.0 documentation.
[9] Victor Debnath, Bikramjit Debnath, Deflection And
Stress Analysis Of A Beam On Different Elements Using
ANSYS APDL" International Journal Of Mechanical
Engineering And Technology, 2014, ISSN 0976 6359
Volume 5, Issue 6, pp. 70-79.

All Rights Reserved, @IJAREST-2015

9