Summary/Abstract

Buckling plays an important role in almost every field of technology. Buckling, as

opposed to simple strength problems such as drawing, pressure, bending and shearing, is
primarily a stability problem. Buckling problem is among the best known technical
examples in stability theory. All relevant buckling problems can be demonstrated with the
WP 120 test stand.
In this experiment, the major concern is the force applied and deflection of the rod
relationship. It is also to verify the Euler theory of buckling, and the experiment is mainly
concentrated at the both end-pinned set up. This means that the effective length of the set
up is the total length of the rod.
To do the test (measurement), we need a testing device (platform) which is listed
in the equipment section. With the data recorded from the experiment, a graph of axial
force versus deflection can be plotted. Comparing the graph plotted with the result
calculated from the Euler formula, we can verify the accuracy of the theory.
Of course the experiment result may not be exactly similar to the calculated
answer (because unknown impurities of the specimen and other source of error), but it
can give us a rough idea of the specimens.
Last but not least, the critical force for buckling is dependant on three factors,
which is E modulus, moment of inertia and characteristic length. Besides, buckling will
only occur, when it is subjected to compressive load.

Statement of Purpose

1. To understand the principal of buckling test.

2. To understand the Euler theory of buckling.
3. To determine the critical buckling loads for columns with various support.
4. To understand the influence of different buckling rod mounting conditions.
5. To understand the influence of material parameters.
6. To find the experimental values of the critical loads that can be applied to the
given load.

Theory

Buckling Theory
If a rod is subjected to longitudinal forces, it can fails in 2 ways.
Plasticized and flattened, if its admissible compressive strain is exceeded.
Suddenly shift to one side and buckle before attaining the admissible compressive
strain, buckling.
The shape of the rod is the factor which determines which of the 2 cases of failure will
occur. Slender, thin rod is more likely to buckle than a thick, stout rod.

Euler Formula
Buckling occurs suddenly and without warning when a certain limit load is
attained. It is therefore an extremely dangerous type of failure. As soon as a rod begins to
buckle, it will become deformed to the point of total destruction. This is typical unstable
behavior. Buckling is a stability problem. The critical limit load Fcritical, above which
buckling can occur is dependant on both the slenderness of the rod, i.e. influence of
length and diameter and the material used. The slenderness ratio, will be introduced
here:
=

lk / i

In this case, lk is the characteristic length of the rod. It takes both the actual length of the
rod and the mounting conditions into consideration.

The influence of diameter in the slenderness ratio is expressed by the inertia radius, i. It is
calculated using the minimum geometrical moment of inertia Iy.
Where,

i =
Iy =

( Iy / A)
bh3 / 12

The influence of material is taken into consideration by longitudinal rigidity of the rod
EA. Here, E is the modulus of elasticity of the respective material and A is the crosssectional area. The influence of various factors on the critical load is summarized in the
Euler formula:
Fcritical =

2 ( EA / 2 )

or expressed in a different form:

Fcritical =

2 ( E Iy / l2 )

Equipment

For the experiment, we used:

Test Device
1 :

Test device
Test device mainly consists of basic frame, the guide columns and the load cross
bar.
5

2 :

Force Measurement
Test force is measured using hydraulic force measuring device. Test force forces

3 :

the piston to produce pressure; the pressure is then measured by pressure gauge.
Specimen Holders
3.1 Bottom specimen holder

4 :

3.2 Top specimen holder

Deformation Measurement
The measuring gauge for measuring the lateral deflection of the rod specimen is
fastened to a guide column with the supplied support.

5 :

The rod specimens contained in the standard set can be used to conduct test on the
influence of mountings, length and material. The influences of eccentric mounting
and different cross sectional shapes can be studied with the WP120.01 accessories
set.

Specimens:
a) Standard set WP120
No.
S8

Material
Aluminum

Diameter (mm)
26 x 6

Length (mm)
600

Mounting
Knife-edge/knife-edge

S9
S10

AlMgSiO.5 F22
Brass CuZn40Pb2
Copper E-Cu

25 x 6
25 x 6

600
600

Knife-edge/knife-edge
Knife-edge/knife-edge

Diameter (mm)
26 x 10

Length (mm)
700

Mounting
Knife-edge/knife-edge

b) Accessories Set WP120

No.
SZ5

Material
Fieberline

Procedure

1.

The test device was set up in horizontal position.

2.

Thrust piece with V notch was inserted into attachment socket and fasten with
6

3.

clamping screw.
Long thrust piece with V notch was inserted into the guide bush of the load cross

4.

bar and was firmly held.

Specimen rod was inserted in the V notch.

5.

The load cross bar was clamped on the guide column in such a manner that there

6.

is still approximate 5mm for the top thrust piece to move

The rod specimen was aligned in such a manner that its buckling direction points
in the direction of the lateral guide columns. The edges of the rod were

7.

perpendicular to the load cross bar.

The rod specimen was pre-tightened with low, non-measurable force.

8.

The measuring gauge was aligned to the middle of the rod specimen using the
support clamps. The measuring gauge was set at a right angle to the direction of

9.

buckling.
The measuring gauge was pre-tightened to 10 mm deflection with the adjustable

support.
10. The rod specimen was slowly loaded by turning the load nut.
11. The deflection was read from the measuring gauge. The deflection was read and
recorded every 0.25 mm up to 1 mm.
12. Above 1 mm deflection, the deflection and force was recorded every interval of
0.5 mm.
13. It was continued until no changes of force, despite an increasing load.
14. The tension was removed slowly from the specimen.
15. The result was recorded.
16. The experiment was repeated with two other specimens.

Data & Observations

Data:
Table: Results of Experiment.
Deflection
(mm)
0
0.25
0.50
0.75

S8 Aluminum

Force (N)
S9 Brass
S10 Copper

AlMgSiO.5

CuZn40Pb2

E-Cu

F22
100
455
545
580

100
175
300
400

100
350
500
625

SZ5 Fieberline

100
350
400
500
8

1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
5.50

625
675
720
750
775
800
800
-

475
580
650
725
750
800
820
850
875
875

700
850
950
1025
1075
1125
1150
1200
1250
1250

550
550
575
575
-

Observations:
1. It can be observed that the design of the V notch of the specimen rod is not
symmetry. This should be the reason that the specimen rod is always bending
toward the bigger-angle side.
2. In the experiment, we observed that, when bending, the largest plastic
deformation is at the middle of the rod.

Analysis and Results

Graph 1: Force vs. Deflection of S8 Aluminum AlMgSiO.5 F22

Graph 2: Force vs. Deflection of S9 Brass CuZn40Pb2

Graph 3: Force vs. Deflection of S10 Copper E-Cu

10

Graph 4: Force vs. Deflection of SZ5 Fieberline

Results:
11

Sample
S8
S9
S10
SZ5

b (mm)

h (mm)

25
25
25
26

6
6
6
10

Iy (mm4)

l (mm)

Fcritical (N)

450
450
450
2166.7

(N/mm2)
70000
104000
125000
20000

600
600
600
700

863.59
1283.05
1542.13
872.84

Calculations:
S8 Aluminum AlMgSiO.5 F22
Moment of Inertia, Iy

= bh3 / 12
= (25)(6)3 / 12
= 450 mm4

Modulus of Elasticity, E = 70000 N/mm2

The critical load, Fcritical

= 2 ( E Iy / l 2 )
= 2 ( 70000 x 450 / 6002 )
= 863.59 N

% Error = |(Theoretical value experimental value)| x 100%

(theoretical value)
= [(863.59 N 800 N) / 863.59 N] x 100%
= 7.363 %

S9 Brass CuZn40Pb2
Moment of Inertia, Iy

= bh3 / 12
= (25)(6)3 / 12
= 450 mm4

Modulus of Elasticity, E = 104000 N/mm2

12

The critical load, Fcritical

= 2 ( E Iy / l 2 )
= 2 ( 104000 x 450 / 6002 )
= 1283.05 N

% Error = |(Theoretical value experimental value)| x 100%

(theoretical value)
= [(1283.05 N 875 N) / 1283.05 N] x 100%
= 31.803 %
S10 Copper E-Cu
Moment of Inertia, Iy

= bh3 / 12
= (25)(6)3 / 12
= 450 mm4

Modulus of Elasticity, E = 125000 N/mm2

The critical load, Fcritical

= 2 ( E Iy / l 2 )
= 2 ( 125000 x 450 / 6002 )
= 1542.13 N

% Error = |(Theoretical value experimental value)| x 100%

(theoretical value)
= [(1542.13 N 1250 N) / 1542.13 N] x 100%
= 18.943 %
SZ5 Fieberline
Moment of Inertia, Iy

= bh3 / 12
= (26)(10)3 / 12
= 2166.7 mm4

Modulus of Elasticity, E = 20000 N/mm2

The critical load, Fcritical

= 2 ( E Iy / l 2 )
= 2 ( 20000 x 2166.7 / 7002 )
= 872.84 N

% Error = |(Theoretical value experimental value)| x 100%

(theoretical value)
= [(872.84 N 575 N) / 872.84 N] x 100%
= 34.123 %

13

Discussion

The percentage error comparing both experimental and theoretical values of the
critical load of the specimen S8 Aluminum AlMgSiO.5 F22 is 7.363 %, 31.803 % for
S9 Brass CuZn40Pb2, 18.943 % for S10 Copper E-Cu and 34.123 % for SZ5
Fieberline. These errors are considered to be large and due to few reasons.
Calibration Error

This is the error that originates in the calibration process.

This type of errors may be caused by the uncertainty in
standard, uncertainty in the calibration process and
randomness in the calibration process such as nonlinearity.

Data Acquisition Error

These are the errors that occur when measuring system is

used to made specific measurement. Example, random
variation of the measuring, installation effects such as
measuring loading and precision errors in recording or

14

indicating devices.
Data Reduction Error

These errors are caused by a variety of errors and

approximations are used in the data reduction process.
Example, interpolations, curve fits and readability of scale
if the gauge.

The specimen used may have already lost part of its elasticity due to fatigue since it has
been used for several times before.

Conclusion

After completing this report, we can verify that Euler theory of buckling, and the
experiment is mainly concentrated at the both-end-pinned set up. This means that the
effective length of the set up is the total length of the rod.
To do the test (measurement), we need a testing device (platform) which is listed
in the equipment section. With the data recorded from the experiment, a graph of axial
force versus deflection can be plotted. Comparing the graph plotted with the result
calculated from the Euler formula, we can verify the accuracy of the theory.
Of course the experiment result may not be exactly similar to the calculated
answer (because unknown impurities of the specimen and other source of error), but it
can give us a rough idea of the specimens.
Lastly, different material has different modulus of elasticity and this difference
will bring an effect on the critical force the material can stand. This is based on the Euler
formula where larger E modulus and geometric moment of inertia and also longer length
will give higher critical load to the specimen, which mean it has higher resistance to
buckling.

15

References

Books

Ferdinand P. Beer and E. Russell Johnston, JR., Mechanics of materials 3rd

Edition in SI Units. 21 Neythal Road, Singapore 2262. McGraw-Hill Book Co.
pp 142, 198-202.

William F. Smith, Foundations of Materials Science and Engineering 3 rd

Edition. 21 Neythal Road, Singapore 2262. McGraw-Hill Book Co.
pp 246-248

16

Appendices

S8 Aluminum AlMgSiO.5 F22

Deflection (mm)
0
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00

Force (N)
100
455
545
580
625
675
720
750
775
800
800

S9 Brass CuZn40Pb2
Deflection (mm)
0
0.25
0.50

Force (N)
100
175
300
17

0.75
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
5.50

400
475
580
650
725
750
800
820
850
875
875

S10 Copper E-Cu

Deflection (mm)
0
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
5.50

Force (N)
100
350
500
625
700
850
950
1025
1075
1125
1150
1200
1250
1250

SZ5 Fieberline
Deflection (mm)
0
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50

Force (N)
100
350
400
500
550
550
575
575

18

19