De Montfort University

Buckling of Strut
Experiment
ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics

Nizamuddin Patel
12/02/2018
 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 2
Objective .................................................................................................................................................... 2
Procedure................................................................................................................................................... 2
Methodology.............................................................................................................................................. 2
Theory ........................................................................................................................................................ 3
Theoretical calculations ............................................................................................................................. 4
Results ........................................................................................................................................................ 5
Discussion................................................................................................................................................... 8
References ............................................................................................................................................... 10

1
De Montfort University P15219444
 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Introduction
This report has been written to find the relationship between buckling and the slenderness ratio for
struts. An experiment was conducted using struts of three different materials- brass, aluminium and
steel. An Instron 3369 testing machine was used and struts of different lengths were used.
Compressive stress was applied to the sample until the sample buckled (sideways deflection).

The buckling load for the specimens were then found and the Euler’s formula and Rankine’s formula
were used to find the Euler and Rankine numbers respectively.

Objective
Refer to lab Sheet1

Procedure
Refer to lab sheet

Specimen lengths (mm): 50, 60, 75, 85, 100, 125, 150, 175, 200, 225

Methodology
The machine used was Instron 3369, this is Instron’s most powerful universal testing system under
50kN. This machine features the following which allow it to be suitable to test buckling of struts:

Alternative machines which are similar and could be used to test the buckling load to almost the same
accuracy are, but not limited to:

 Euler Buckling Apparatus SM1005

 HST45 Buckling of Struts
 Euler Buckling of a Column STR12
 DARTEC M1501

The crosshead was raised of the machine using the controls to allow the test specimen to be inserted
into the machine. The specimen was tightened from the top and bottom. A safety glass is placed in
front of the machine to prevent injuries due to a loose strut. The test is automatically stopped after
the machine detects buckling (usually an increase in buckling)

1De Montfort University (2018). ENGD3016 Course Work II: Castigliano’s and Buckling Experiments. [Online] De
Montfort University. Available at: https://vle.dmu.ac.uk/bbcswebdav/pid-3864596-dt-content-rid-
6401211_1/xid-6401211_1 [Accessed 8 Feb. 2018].

2
De Montfort University P15219444
 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Theory
Refer to lab sheet for source of equations and its derivations.
𝜋2 𝐸𝐼
𝐸𝑢𝑙𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = 𝑃𝐸 = 𝑙 2
( )
𝑘

𝑃𝐸
𝐸𝑢𝑙𝑒𝑟 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 𝜎𝐸 = 𝐴

E = Young’s modulus
I = Second moment of area
A = Cross sectional area

Actual end stress at failure

𝑃𝑏
𝜎𝑓 =
𝐴
𝑃𝑏 = 𝑂𝑏𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝐵𝑢𝑐𝑘𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑
𝜋𝑑 2 𝜋×0.0052
𝐴 = 𝐶𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 = 4
= 4
= 1.9635 × 10−5 𝑚2

Slenderness ratio
𝜋𝑑 4 𝜋×0.0054
𝐼 = 𝑆𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 = 64
= 64
= 3.06796 × 10−11 𝑚4
𝑑 0.005
𝑘= 4
= 4
= 1.25 × 10−3 𝑚
𝑙 4𝑙
𝑠𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 = 𝑘 = 𝑑

Rankin’s formula
𝑓𝑐 𝐴
𝑃=
𝑙 2
1+𝑎( )
𝑘
𝑃 = 𝐶𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑
𝑓𝑐 = 𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ
𝐴 = 𝐶𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎
𝑙 = 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ
𝑘 = 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑢𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ
𝑎 = 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘𝑖𝑛′ 𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 =
𝜋2 × 𝐸

𝑓𝑐 𝐴 540 × 106 × 1.9635 × 10−5

(example for steel): P = = = 9602.2
𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑙 2 540 × 106 2
1+ × ( ) 1+ 2 × (20)
𝜋2 × 𝐸 𝑘 𝜋 × 210 × 109

3
De Montfort University P15219444
 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics

Experimental material properties

Material Yield Strength Young’s Modulus

Steel 540MPa 210GPa

Aluminium 276MPa 76GPa

Brass 200MPa 100GPa

Table 1: Material properties

Theoretical calculations
Steel

Given in table 1, the Young’s modulus (E) for steel is 210GPa, using the maximum specimen length of
225mm.
𝜋2 𝐸𝐼 𝜋2 ×(210×109)×(3.06796×10−11 ) 63.587
𝑃𝐸 = = = = 1256.0395
𝑙2 0.2252 0.050625
𝑃𝐸 1256.0395
𝐸𝑢𝑙𝑒𝑟 𝑆𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠(𝜎𝐸 ) = 𝐴
= 1.9635×10−5 = 63.97𝑀𝑃𝑎

Actual Stress at failure for steel (d= 50mm, L=225mm)

1386
𝜎𝑓 = = 70.588 𝑀𝑃𝑎
1.9635×10−5

4
De Montfort University P15219444
 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Results
Steel

Observed
Diameter Length Actual Euler Slenderness Rankine Rankine
Buckling Euler Load
(m) (m) Stress Stress ratio Load Stress
Load (N)

0.005 0.05 9882 503286127 101739.35 5.18E+09 20 9602.17432 4.89E+08

0.005 0.06 8142 414668655 70652.326 3.60E+09 24 9219.32114 4.70E+08

0.005 0.075 8707 443443869 45217.489 2.30E+09 30 8588.89758 4.37E+08

0.005 0.085 7670 390629892 35203.927 1.79E+09 34 8148.63353 4.15E+08

0.005 0.1 4718 240285767 25434.837 1.30E+09 40 7483.3386 3.81E+08

0.005 0.125 3045 155080577 16278.296 8.29E+08 50 6420.72991 3.27E+08

0.005 0.15 2550 129870434 11304.372 5.76E+08 60 5471.19612 2.79E+08

0.005 0.175 1932 98395952 8305.2531 4.23E+08 70 4657.23311 2.37E+08

0.005 0.2 1586 80774316.7 6358.7094 3.24E+08 80 3974.89993 2.02E+08

0.005 0.225 1386 70588400.4 5024.1654 2.56E+08 90 3408.87310 1.74E+08

Table 2: Experimental values of buckling load for Steel

Stress against Slenderness Ratio: Steel

6E+09

5E+09

4E+09
Stress

3E+09 Actual Stress

Euler Stress

2E+09 Rankine Stress

1E+09

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Slenderness Ratio

Table 3: Graphical representation of buckling load for steel

5
De Montfort University P15219444
 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Aluminium
Observed
Diameter Length Actual Euler Euler Slenderness Rankine Rankine
Buckling
(m) (m) Stress Load Stress ratio Load Stress
Load (N)

0.005 0.05 4506 229488696 36819.955 1.88E+09 20 4723.96332 2.41E+08

0.005 0.06 4457 226993146 25569.413 1.30E+09 24 4471.53803 2.28E+08

0.005 0.075 2823 143774209 16364.425 8.33E+08 30 4071.07049 2.07E+08

0.005 0.085 2668 135880124 12740.469 6.49E+08 34 3802.02812 1.94E+08

0.005 0.1 2019 102826826 9204.9888 4.69E+08 40 3411.05752 1.74E+08

0.005 0.125 1381 70333752.5 5891.1928 3.00E+08 50 2822.68686 1.44E+08

0.005 0.15 997 50776793 4091.1061 2.08E+08 60 2331.21891 1.19E+08

0.005 0.175 674 34326538.1 3005.7106 1.53E+08 70 1933.38521 9.85E+07

0.005 0.2 780 39725073.8 2301.2472 1.17E+08 80 1615.31461 8.23E+07

0.005 0.225 556 28316847.5 1818.8572 9.26E+07 90 1361.79774 6.93E+07

Table 4: Experimental values of buckling for Aluminium

Stress against Slenderness Ratio: Aluminium

2E+09

1.8E+09

1.6E+09

1.4E+09

1.2E+09
Stress

1E+09 Actual Stress

Euler Stress
800000000
Rankine Stress
600000000

400000000

200000000

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Slenderness Ratio

Table 5: Graphical representation of buckling load for Aluminium

6
De Montfort University P15219444
 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Brass
Observed
Diameter Length Actual Euler Euler Slenderness Rankine Rankine
Buckling
(m) (m) Stress Load Stress ratio Load Stress
Load (N)

0.005 0.05 4742 241508077 12111.827 6.17E+08 20 3632.54761 1.85E+08

0.005 0.06 5067 258060191 8410.9912 4.28E+08 24 3516.53394 1.79E+08

0.005 0.075 4586 233563062 5383.0344 2.74E+08 30 3321.26477 1.69E+08

0.005 0.085 3188 162363507 4190.9437 2.13E+08 34 3181.67007 1.62E+08

0.005 0.1 2933 149376463 3027.9568 1.54E+08 40 2965.49497 1.51E+08

0.005 0.125 734 37382313 1937.8924 9.87E+07 50 2606.51495 1.33E+08

0.005 0.15 1274 64884287.2 1345.7586 6.85E+07 60 2270.57672 1.16E+08

0.005 0.175 1009 51387948 988.7206 5.04E+07 70 1970.44362 1.00E+08

0.005 0.2 819 41711327.5 756.98921 3.86E+07 80 1709.68341 8.71E+07

0.005 0.225 591 30099382.8 598.61092 3.05E+07 90 1486.45064 7.57E+07

Table 6: Experimental values of buckling load for brass

Stress against Slenderness Ratio: Brass

700000000

600000000

500000000

400000000
Stress

Actual Stress
300000000 Euler Stress
Rankine Stress
200000000

100000000

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Slenderness Ratio

Table 7: Graphical representation of buckling load on Brass

7
De Montfort University P15219444
 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
Discussion

(5.18𝐸+9)− 503286127
Euler vs actual stress for steel @0.05m length: 503286127
× 100 = 929.236%

|(4.89𝐸+8)− 503286127|
Rankine vs actual stress for steel @0.05m length: 503286127
× 100 = 2.839%

Equation 1: Percentage error for steel

(2.56+8)− 70588400.4
Euler vs actual stress for steel @0.225m length: 70588400.4
× 100 = 279.666%

|(1.74𝐸+8)− 70588400.4|
Rankine vs actual stress for steel @0.225m length: 70588400.4
× 100 = 153.58%

Equation 2: percentage error for steel at 88 slenderness ratio

Stress against Slenderness Ratio: Steel

600000000
500000000
400000000
Stress

300000000
Actual Stress
200000000
100000000 Rankine Stress

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Slenderness Ratio

Figure 1: Actual vs Rankine stress on steel

Comparing experimental results

Table 3 shows the graphical representation of the experimental values for steel. From the graph it is
obvious to see that the Euler stress from 20-60 slenderness ratio has very little ratio and it is very
inaccurate when compared with Rankine stress. Equation 1 reinforces this statement as the difference
between the two percentage differences are astronomical, in fact 926.397%. For steel below 60
slenderness ratio Rankine is more accurate than Euler. Post 60 slenderness ratio, Euler figures
improve, but Rankine calculations still outshine Euler. Looking at the max slenderness ratio of 90, the
differences for between the two formulas are shown in Equation 2. The difference between the two
formulas is 126.086%, this is a 634.73% difference in gap between the two slenderness ratios.

Table 2 also shows Rankine is consistent throughout the change in length/slenderness. Using figure 2
we can further look into the relationship between Rankine and actual stress for steel. 20, 30, 34
slenderness ratios are almost identical to the Rankine value equivalents, this suggests that the Rankine
formula is the best formula to be used for steel. However, this assumption may not be true for
slenderness ratios outside the 20-88 slenderness ratios. The trend for Rankine and actual are both
bearish, which further reinforces my point Rankine is the best formula.

From this analysis I believe it is safe to say that for steel the best formula to use to determine buckling
stress is Rankine.

8
De Montfort University P15219444
 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics

(1.53𝐸+8)− 34326538.1
Euler vs actual stress for steel @0.175m length: 34326538.1
× 100 = 345.72%

|(9.85𝐸+7)− 34326538.1|
Rankine vs actual stress for steel @0.175m length: 34326538.1
× 100 = 186.95%
Equation 3: Difference between Euler and actual for aluminium at 70 slenderness

(9.26E+07)−28316847.5
Euler vs actual stress for steel @0.225m length: 28316847.5
× 100 = 227.014%

|(6.93𝐸+7)− 28316847.5|
Rankine vs actual stress for steel @0.225m length: 28316847.5
× 100 = 144.73%

Equation 4: Difference between Rankine and actual at 90 slenderness

Table 5 shows the graph of the experimental values and theoretical values for aluminium. Table 5 and
Table 3 are almost identical as the Euler value before 60 slenderness ratio is totally out of proportion
when compared with Rankine. Rankine stress and actual stress are almost identical for slenderness
ratios 20 and 24 and stays fairly close throughout as opposed to Euler which starts off with a banging
initial value and slowly tries to get closer to the actual value. Rankine is a more reliable figure before
slenderness ratio for Aluminium, this can be seen in equation 3 where Rankine is 158.77% more
accurate compared with Euler on 70 slenderness ratio. The statement of Rankine being a better
indicator compared with Euler is reinforced using equation 4, where the final slenderness ratio of 90,
Rankine is more than double more accurate compared with Euler.

Table 7 shows the graph for brass. The overall trend for all three figures are bearish where as
slenderness increases the stress decreases. Looking at table 7 it is obvious to see that Euler is more
accurate after 60 slenderness ratio. And looking overall, I believe Euler is more accurate as 7 out of the
10 lengths are closer to the actual stress compared with Rankine, they’re: 24, 30, 50, 60, 70, 80 and
90. The slenderness ratio of 50 looks like an anomaly on table 7 as it looks out of place from the rest of
the chart.

The experiment is prone to a few errors as no experiment is perfect. This could affect the accuracy of
the results which may change which theoretical stress theories are best for which material. The error
which may have had a major impact on the results are:

 Manufacturing error- The diameters used for all the lengths were 0.05m, this was a
manufacturer specification and was not measured before the start of the experiment. The
manufacturer has a tolerance of ±0.05mm which could have had affected the results. A
recommendation to reduce this error is to measure the metal samples. Three measurements
should be taken per sample, one at the bottom, one at the top and one in the middle. The
average of the three values should be used and this will be able to reduce the errors.
 Human error- As the experiment was conducted by a human with the aid of a machine, the
human had a play to part in terms of errors. When the strut is placed into the machine the
operator may have tightened the strut too much which may have impacted the strength of the
material as the strut has undergone compressive stress. Another way a human may have
made a mistake is that he may not have placed the strut directly in the middle which could
impact the load being applied equally. To minimise this error it is best to use other calibrating
materials such as a laser to perfectly position the strut and the machine to tightened the strut.
 Software error- As the software is designed to stop applying load once buckling is occurred,
the software may have had an inaccurate reading from one of its sensors to show that there is
displacement occurring on the strut. To reduce this error it is best to apply the full load until
the sample breaks, this will lead to a better result

9
De Montfort University P15219444
 ENGD3016- Solid Mechanics
 Hysteresis error- The Instron testing machine used is the highest spec model currently out.
This suggests that the machine is pretty new. However as all machines undergo testing and
other members of my class have already conducted the experiment beforehand, hysteresis
error may have impacted the results.
 The material may have had imperfections and as no repeat experiments have been ran the
accuracy of the results may have been affected. This could be reduced if each sample are
tested three times and an average was used.

In conclusion from the experiment conducted Rankine is the best stress figure to use for Steel and
Aluminium and Euler is the best stress figure to use for Brass. Using Euler for Steel or Aluminium will
not be the best engineering decision as it will be a waste of resources and time as the Euler figures are
significantly higher where as there is no need for this. However, for good engineering design, factor of
safety will need to be considered. A similarity between all three mateirals and theories is that as
slenderness increases, stress decreases. Euler stress is almost always an over estimate of the actual
stress.

References
Anon, (2018). Lecture 6- Buckling instability. [online] Available at:
https://vle.dmu.ac.uk/bbcswebdav/pid-3868859-dt-content-rid-
6412592_1/courses/ENGD3016_2018_Y/Strain_energy.pdf [Accessed 12 Feb. 2018].

Mubeen, A. (n.d.). Mechanics of solids.

Roymech.co.uk. (2018). Struts. [online] Available at:

http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/Mechanics/Struts.html [Accessed 16 Feb. 2018].

Walker, A. (1975). The buckling of struts. London: Chatto & Windus.

De Montfort University (2018). ENGD3016 Course Work II: Castigliano’s and Buckling Experiments.
[Online] De Montfort University. Available at: https://vle.dmu.ac.uk/bbcswebdav/pid-3864596-dt-
content-rid-6401211_1/xid-6401211_1 [Accessed 8 Feb. 2018].

10
De Montfort University P15219444