c

c c


cc


c
  cc c
 
 c
ccc
°


The external forces that a structure resists are called loads. Structures must also resist
their own weight and contents. Both the size of components and the materials that are
used are relevant to how well a structure can resist a load (Graeme Lofts et al l, 2010).

A typical structural cantilever is shown in diagram 1. A cantilever is made of a structured

section like a timber plank or concrete beam or steel. It has unsupported length ͚L͛
(cantilever length) and a fixed end like that may be clamped into place and rigidly fixed. It
is free on the other end of the cantilever

.

Diagram 1: The turning force (Mortan, 2004).

The cantilever may have point vertical load ͚F͛ anywhere on the length at a distance of ͚L͛
from the fixed end. The other vertical load is the self weight of the cantilever. The vertical
load on the cantilever causes clockwise torque at the fixed end (also called the pivot
point).

The turning effect of a force is called torque. It is produced by a force that acts at a
distance from a point of rotation. The variables that influence the magnitude of torque
are distance from the point of rotation or clamping, the direction of the force in relation
to that same point and the size of the force.

The turning force (torque) bends the section as shown in diagram 2.

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

 
Diagram 2: diagram of bending (Mortan, 2004).

Bending is a term used to describe a torque force that causes a particular curving
deformation in a structure. When bending, a structure tends to curve. Some fibres of the
cross section move closer together and other fibres move further apart, causing
compression on one side and tension in the other. It is easier to break a structure by
bending than through sheer, so engineers take special care to ensure that structures are
strong enough to resist bending. When in tension, the molecules move further apart and
the material gets longer. When in compression they move closer together and the
material gets shorter.

The stress unit is usually used for comparisons of the performance of different sized loads
on different sized objects. However, the magnitude of the force and therefore torque can
be used when the size of the load, the size of the objects as well as the area the force is
applied are controlled in the experiment. (Graeme Lofts et all, 2010). 

Deflection is a term that is used to describe the degree to w hich a structural element is
displaced under a load and the associated bending (curving of a section) it what causes
the free end of the cantilever to deflect downward (refer to diagram 3). The amount of
the deflection ͚h͛ depends on:

1. Applied load ͚F͛.

2. Distance ͚L͛ of the load from pivot.

3. The width of the plank of wood ͚b͛.

3. Cross section depth ͚d͛, and width ͚b͛ and the section property called moment of inertia
͚I͛ where I = (bd^3)/12

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

4. Elastic modulus of the material of the cantilever ͚E͛ is higher in hard wood (Tasmanian
Oak) than soft wood (Pine Wood).

These can be linked by the equation

h=(FL^3)/(3EI)...................................... ..................... equation 1

Under low loads the free end of the cantilever will return to the original point when the
load is removed.This means that the wood acted ͚elastically͛.

Under a large load, torque, the free end of a cantilever does not return to the original
point and shows a permanent change due to the fibres in the section permanently
changing. This is known as the permanent vertical deformation and when this is not equal
to zero it is termed plastic deformation (G. Gorenc and R. Tinyou, 1984).

Diagram 3: Deflection and permanent vertical deformation.

 
 

*The distance of the weights from the point of clamping ; ͚L͛, measured in mm

*The mass of the weights added to the cantilever ͚m͛, measured in kg [Weight (W) = Mass
(m) x acceleration due to gravity (g) = Force (F)]

*The deflection (dependant), ͚h͛, measured in mm

*Type of wood (dependant)

*Permanent vertical deformation (dependant), ͚p͛

*Torque (dependant),͚t͛, measured in kgm Throughout this report the use of the word
torque ignores the self-weight torque of the cantilever.

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

i   

In this experiment it was assumed that the weighing scale used to weigh the masses is
accurate. It is also assumed that the dimensions of any plank of either Tasmanian Oak or
Pine wood match the specifications for the planks tested and that the wood has a uniform
density. It is assumed that there are no pre-existing cracks exist in the wood and that ea ch
wooden plank has comparable moisture content throughout the experiment.

In addition we have assumed that the wood is not undergoing warping and that the
acceleration due to gravity is roughly ten meters per second per second where the
experiment in conducted. It is assumed that the humidity of the physics room is constant
throughout the investigation and that the ex periment is taking place under Standard
Laboratory Conditions (SLC) which is defined as 1 atmosphere of pressure at 25*C.

The assumption that previous experimental work on the wooden beam will not affect
subsequent results was made. Since torque acts perpendicular to the surface of the
beam, it is assumed that despite bending, the force will continue to act perpendicular to
the wood͛s surface.

 

It is expected that the deflection of the plank of wood will increase as heavier masses are
attached to it at a constant distance from the point of clamping. If this distance is
decreased, the deflection will decrease. It is expected that this part of the experiment will
result in permanent vertical deformation in the wood and that the hard Tasmanian Oak
wood will break during the experiment. The permanent vertical deformation should
increase proportional to torque.

  

Torque (Force in Newtons * horizontal lever arm length in metres)

Weight: Mass (grams)* Acceleration due to gravity

 

The purpose of this experimental investigation is to explore the structural properties of

wooden beams. This will involve observing elastic and plastic behaviours of two different
types of wood under different magnitudes of torque. The consequential affect of applying
a load to already bent wood, the deflection caused by a load and how these two
relationships vary due to the composition of the actual wood (hard and soft) will be
graphed and analysed to deduce the relationships between these three variables. In
addition, the breaking torque and corresponding permanent vertical deformation of both
wooden beams will be examined.

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

This will be achieved by having a set of forces that will be applied to the free end of the
cantilever (plank of wood), and the leng ths varied and deflections measured for each of
the lengths. This will be repeated for both types of wood, allowing for the differences in
resistance to bending between the two to be identified. This allows us to analyse the
dependant variable ʹ deflection, at the unsupported end (for each length and type of
wood). The permanent vertical deformation at each stage of this experiment due to the
effects off the bending will also be recorded. This allows us to account for the effects of
͚creep͛ ʹ permanent vertical deformation, on the above relationship. The range of
weights that will be used will range from 1000 g to 4000g.

The torque will be varied by maintaining a constant distance and varying the weight
applied using the mass range stated above. When the full set of masses have been
applied and the results recorded, the distance is varied in increments of 10cm and the
masses reapplied and the results recorded.

By unloading the beams, the relationship between the permanent vertical deformati on
and torque was explored, and how this was affected by the wood co mposition of the
beam and the level of loading.

!  

͚Ruler͛: Used to measure the deflection, the permanent vertical deformation and the
horizontal distance component of torque.

G-clamps: Used to keep the planks of wood in place.

Mixed masses/Weights: Used to provide force component of torque . Spare mixed masses
were also used to ensure the back of the plank does not lift up in the air thus increasing
leverage due to leverage and compromising the validity of the results.

Hooked mass holder: Used to hold the masses while they are attached onto the plank of
wood.

Hard wood plank: Used to examine its properties

Soft wood plank: Used to examine its properties

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

Diagram 4: The experimental set up (not to scale) (Mortan, 2004). c

ë

Safety goggles were worn during the experiment.

!    

Measure (͚ruler͛): A straightedge piece of wood that is calibrated with increments that
indicate length. The smallest division on the ruler used was 1mm. The mixed masses
were weighed using a laboratory scale.

!
° 

1. c Safety glasses were worn

2. c The plank of wood is clamped with the G clamp using pieces of rough wood to
secure it, onto the table top as show in t he diagram. The hooked mass holder was
attached to end of the plank.
3. c To examine the soft pine wood, a mass was placed at the end of a plank of soft
pine wood using a hooked mass holder that allowed the masses to hang when the
wood was extended off the table. Whenever positioned on the table, the plank of
wood was secured into place with a G clamp and adjusted when needed. Sections
of wood that extended across the table where secured down using spare masses.
4. c the plank length was increased (varied) in increments from 0cm to 100cm in
increments of 10cm. At first, only the hooked mass holder attached to the end of
the plank was examined to establish whether there was any observable bending
due to the mass of the hooked mass holder and plank.
5. c The deflection of the plank was observed and recorded at each increment . The
deflection was measured from the last measurement of p ermanent vertical

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

 deformation. However, the permanent vertical defor mation was always measured
from original height. Experimental method for experiment 1 ʹ deflection.
6. c The wood was then extended by 10cm away from the edge of the table, any
existing masses were removed from the hooked mass holder and one mass of
approximately 1kg placed on the mass holder.
7. c Deflection was observed and a ruler was used to measure this. The results were
recorded. ±Experimental method for experiment 1 ʹ deflection
8. c The mass was unloaded and permanent vertical deformation was observed. A
ruler was used to measure this and the results were recorded. ±Experimental
method for experiment 2 ʹ permanent vertical deformation
9. c The previous masses were reloaded an additional mass was attached to the
hooked mass holder and steps 7 to 8 were repeated. This step was repeated thrice
(finally 4kg)
10. cThe above procedural steps (6-9) were repeated but an additional increment of
10cm was made, cumulative of previous additions of 10cm.
11. cThe above step was repeated until the extension ͚L͛ was 100cm. When the wood
snapped during this process, the experiment proceeded to the step below rather
than proceeding till 100cm. ± Experimental method for experiment 3 ʹ the break
test
12. cSteps 3-12 were repeated but for hard wood (Tasmanian Oak) rather than soft
wood (Pine wood).
13. cThe results were recorded.

 
 

-Distance of mass from the point of clamping.

-The magnitude of the weight.

-Type of wood used.

The above variables were varied with intent during the experiment. Thus they were
controlled.

-The deflection (dependant variable) and the permanent vertical deformation

(dependant variable) were observed and recorded.

-The breaking torque of either type of wood (dependant variable) was observed
and recorded as applicable.

-The torque (dependant) is dependent on the mass and the horizontal distance
from the point of clamping. However, it was indirectly controlled by the control of each of
its composing values.

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

 

°
c
c

c 
cc c°
cc c  c
c
cc

c

c  c

c
c 

c
c c
c


c
c
cc


c
cc
c 
c
c c
cc

c
cc
 c cc
 c
c
c°
c

c

cc c 
 c c c 
cc

c
c

cc

cc
c
Recalling that ͞the plank length was increased (varied) in increments from 0cm to
100cm in increments of 10cm. At first, only the hooked mass holder attached to the
end of the plank was examined to establish whether there was any observable
bending due to the mass of the hooked mass holder and plank .͟ From the
experimental method ʹ The weight of the hooked mass holder was found to be
insignificant and would not compromise the integrity of the results.

They have been

simplified in the
graphs to 1, 2, 3
While the masses used were (g): 1008 and 4 kg
2009
3006
3998

ý
°ë  mm - mm ʹ gʹ mass of Nm - cm ʹ
deflection permanent weights torque distance
vertical from point
deformation of clamping
ë
   M M Kg Nm M
     Convenience Convenience

 ë

  
Convenience Convention Accuracy

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

 Diagram 7

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

Diagram 8

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

 Diagram 5

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

 Diagram 6

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

SOFT WOOD


 
   
v !" ! !" !" !" #! "
10 1008 0.8 0.1008
10 2009 1 0.2009
10 3006 1.5 0.3006
10 3998 2 0 0.3998


20 1008 3.5 $%&$'(
20 2009 8 $%)$'*
20 3006 13 $%($'&
20 3998 17 0 $%+,,(


30 1008 11 0.3024
30 2011 23 0.6033
30 3006 38 0.9018
30 3998 52 2 '%',,)


40 1008 20 0.4032
40 2012 52 0.8048
40 3006 80 1.2024
40 3998 102 11 1.5992

50 1008 52 0.504
50 2013 103 1.0065
50 3006 165 1.503
50 3998 232 41 1.999

60 1008 92 0.6048
60 2014 196 1.2084
60 3006 279 1.8036
60 4000 333 421 2.4

80 1008 203 $%*$()
80 2014 318 '%(''&
80 3006 380 &%)$)*
80 4000 440 620 -%&

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

 HARD WOOD


 
     
v !" ! !" !" !" #! " 
10 1008 1 0.1008
10 2009 2 0.2009
10 3006 2.5 0.3006
10 3998 3 1 0.3998

20 1008 3 0.2016
20 2009 7 0.4018
20 3006 10 0.6012
20 3998 13 2 0.7996

30 1008 6 0.3024
30 2011 14 0.6033
30 3006 23 0.9018
30 3998 32 3 1.1994

40 1008 15 0.4032
40 2012 32 0.8048
40 3006 49 1.2024
40 3998 66 5 1.5992

50 1008 29 0.504
50 2013 61 1.0065
50 3006 92 1.503
50 3998 126 10 1.999

60 1008 47 0.6048
60 2014 96 1.2084
60 3006 132 1.8036
60 4000 213 18 2.4

70 1008 73 0.7056
70 2014 145 1.4098
70 3006 260 2.1042
70 4000 276 29 2.8

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

 80 1008 106 0.8064
80 2014 208 1.6112
80 3006 294 37 2.4048

100 1008 135 1.008

100 2014 265 2.014
100 3006 367 3.006
100 4000 460 4

i cc c

cc
c
 cc
c

cc
c 
!c
cc

 ccc"c c
cc 
cc#$% cc
c c cc
c c

&' cc c
c



c c
c

 c

c

c c
 c


 c
c
 c
c

c
 c
c

(c

i 

°
c  c cc
c c
c   c
c
cc
c
(


 c This
indicates that the hard wood plank is stronger than the soft wood. The soft would
snapped at 3.2Nm but the hard wood was safe (see diagram 6).

Highlighted in yellow on the tabl e above are two data points pertaining to the soft wood
beam where the permanent vertical deformation was recorded as zero. This means that
when the load was removed from the end of the cantilever, it returned to its original,
unbent position. This is an example of elastic deformation. Every other data point in the
grouping column for permanent vertical deformation is an example of plastic
deformation. By comparison, the hard wood did not expe rience any elastic deformation
at all. Both of these observations are represented in the graphs of permanent vertical
deformation for hard and soft wood.

As indicated in both the graphs for hard and soft wood, a positive line of best fit indicates
positive relationship between the deflection and the torque. The almost linear positive
relationship that exists between torque and permanent vertical deformation is
compatible with this result. This linear relationship is further demonstrated by the graphs
of permanent vertical deformation that are available in the appendix.

A particularly meaningful result was singled out in diagram no.5. It was apparent that
identical values of torque could yield significantly differe nt values of deflection. This is
actually because torque is not actually directly proportional to deflection. The
mathematical relationship between torque and deflection (refer to equation 1 from the
theory section) means that the different in the hypothetical points of data 2kg x 20cm
which has the same torque as a hypothetical 4kg at 10 result in very different deflections.

Deflection = (FL^3)/(3EI) which can be rewritten as: h=(TL^2)/(3EI) - vc


 c
c


 cc
c
c
(

cc
c 
c 
 . This component of the equation is
consistent with the empirical observation of the discrepancy in deflection for consistent

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

values of torque. L increases at a greater rate (^2) compared to the load. Therefore,
deflection is proportional to the square of the length. Therefore, the length has a far more
significant positive bearing on the overall deflection than the weight component of
torque. Again this is consistent with the corresponding data values from the data table for
that value of torque. This has been conveniently highlighted in the collected data in red.

›c


 c
c
 cc



cThis is the same across the experiment, for a constant
cross sectional area of the beam. Since both beams have the same cross sectional area
the moment of inertia is insignificant in explaining the above results.

The soft wood graph is steeper when imposed on the same axis as the hard wood graph.
This can verify by referring to the light blue highlights within the above table tables. The
highlighted data compares equivalent data points on each of the graph to illustrate the
conclusion that the soft wood is more plastic than the hard wood.

)c
c
c cc


* , which is unique for different materials. The Pinewood has a
lower and the Tasmanian Oak has higher modules of elasticity. From the comparative
gradients (The deflection graph pine wood is steeper) of either wood, it may be noticed
that hard wood deflects less than soft wood for the same torque. This can also be
accounted for by the deflection equation. A lower modulu s of elasticity corresponds with
greater steepness in a graph of deflection. Since the modulus of elasticity is inversely
proportional to the deflection, the results produced are theoretically sound. (G. Gorenc
and R. Tinyou, 1984)

.i


Absolute
error of +/-0.0005kg (derived from the
Weight: smallest increment on the ruler)
Absolute +/-0.0005m (derived from 1g ʹ
error of the smallest increment of the
Distance: ruler)
For simplicity, the calculation of the uncertainty of the torque was placed at the
'maximum' uncertainty, since each single point will have its own uncertainty due to
the fact that it is calculated from the uncertainty of weight (A) and the uncertainty of
distance (B) with the equation (DeltaA/A)+(DeltaB/B) which is dependent on the
individual value of each point of data. Instead, the following simplification utilised the
maximum possible error of the vertical axis for this experiment for every value of
torque for uniformity : +/- 0.0055Nm.

The uncertainty for the deflection and the permanent vertical deformation (the
vertical error bars was measured normally and is represented in the error bars on the
graphs)

Absolute error of deflection/permanent vertical deformation: +/-0.5mm

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department

 *note*parallax error has not been accounted for here since this error has
presumably been eliminated due to the use of a sheet of white paper placed
behind measuring instruments to aid the naked eye in judging measurements.

 

The structural properties of the wooden beams were mostly successfully examined. The
exceptions are the experiment into the breaking stress of the Tasmanian Oak wood,
which was not found during the practical component of the investigation. As a result, this
experiment was not a success. However, the elastic and plastic behaviours of two
different types of woods were identified, measured and recorded. The breaking torque
for soft wood was identified and the mechanism of permanent vertical deformation was
successful investigated. The deflection caused by the load and how these two
relationships vary due to the composition of the actual wood (hard and soft ) was also
successfully graphed and analysed. This was then compared to a mathematical
relationship that explained the results . Every experiment͛s results were consistent with
the associated theory. A possible error consideration /possible reason for discrepancy
from theory could have been that the uncertainties of the calculated torque was
determined loosely and broadly by using the rules for calculating uncertainty and
absolute error (See the ͚error and uncertainty͛ in the results section for details) rather
than precisely for each data point . This experiment could be improved by using a
compass to measure the angle formed between the normal and the bent wood with every
change in mass to ascertain the precise perpendicular component of torque around the
point of clamping by inducting the associated data into a suitable trigonometric equation.

i/0 

Mr.Haydn ʹ For passing on his theoretical knowledge and directing the practical
investigation.

Scott L and Mitchell C - for their contribution and support during the experimental
investigation.

 

Graeme Lofts et all (2010). Ô c *

c$c c+,)c *
c
c#c-c"c. Milton, Victoria:
Jacaranda.

G.Gorenc and R.Tinyou (1984) .

c/



c . Kensington, New South Whales:
New South Wales University Press LTD.

Wayne Mortan. (2004). .0ccc,



 Available:
http://www.practicalphysics.org/go/textonly/Experiment_430.html. Last accessed 28
May 2010.

© 2010 Melbourne High School Physics Department