Experiment No 8: Unsymmetrical bending and

determination of shearcentre
Ritik Chaudhary, R Roshan, Sanas Varad R, Srikant Venkataraman, Sukran, Raadhakrishnan R. A. (SC19B026),
Rashmi Singh (SC19B029),V Raghav (SC19B027), Pratyaksh Maru (SC19B025), Ramana Bharathi (SC19B028)
Department of Aerospace Engineering, IIST
(Dated: October 24, 2022)
This report focuses on determining the shear centre in a beam and investigating unsymmetrical
bending in various beam cross-sections. For various loads and angles of beam rotation, horizontal
and vertical deflections are discovered. Theoretical and experimental data are compared using Mohr
circles. A C-section beam’s shear centre location is established and compared to theoretical values.

I. NOMENCLATURE

P Force (N)
u Displacement in x direction ( mm )
v Displacement in y direction ( mm )
Ixx second moment of area about x axis ( m4 )
Iyy second moment of area about y axis ( m4 )

FIG. 1. Direct stress distribution due to bending

for the internal bending moment developed Mx and

My we derive the expression for normal stress σz at any
II. INTRODUCTION
arbitrary point of cross section , the expression involves
geometric parameters Ixx , Iyy and Ixy as well ,
By definition
When the principle axis does not coincide with the Z
plane on which stress is applied, unsymmetrical bending Mx = σz y dA
results. If the bending occurs around an axis that is per-
pendicular to the plane of symmetry, the theory of simple
bending applies. Bending occurs in a plane other than
Z
the primary axis plane in unsymmetrical bending, and if My = σz x dA
the beam is also pushed upon by shear force, the beam
bends as well as twists. Shear centre is a location on the and note due to the assumption of pure bending , net
beam that may or may not coincide with the centroid, integrated axial force over the cross section remains 0 ,
where the beam merely bends and does not twist when
the loads act on it. Z
σz dA = 0

and by the beam bending theory ,strain at any point

in the cross section is proportional to its distance from
neutral axis ( r) and the curvature , taking ρ as curvature
,
III. THEORY
r
ϵz =
ρ
Based on two assumptions that plane section remains and by Hooke’s law
plane after deformation , and the material deforms un-
der elastic limit and obey Hooke’s law , we derive an Er
expression σz =
ρ
 2

so integrating σz over the cross section gives that

∂ 2 My
Z
r dA = 0 wx = −
∂z 2
Deflection due to bending
The neutral axis passes through centroid of the cross sec-
tion.

r = x sin α + y cos α

on solving ,

   
My Ixx − Mx Ixy Mx Iyy − My Ixy
σz = 2
x+ 2
y
Ixx Iyy − Ixy Ixx Iyy − Ixy

Load intensity related to bending moment

FIG. 3. Determination of beam deflection due to bending

By curvature relationship ,

1 ∂2ζ
=
ρ z

here , ζ is displacement of the centroid of the consid-

ered section , and its x and y components are u and v
respectively ,
FIG. 2. Equilibrium of a beam element supporting force in u = −ζ sin α and v = −ζ cos α
yz plane double differentiating , and substituting in the expres-
sion of σz ,
from force equilibrium , ′′
Mx = −EIxy u − EIxx v
′′

 
∂Sy
Sy + δz + wy δz − Sy = 0
∂z
′′ ′′
My = −EIyy u − EIxy v
∂Sy Shear center
wy = −
∂z
From moments equilibrium about point A ,

δz 2
   
∂Mx ∂Sy
Mx + δz − Sy + δz δz − wy − Mx = 0
∂z ∂z 2

∂Mx
Sy =
∂z

FIG. 4. a) general stress system on an element of a closed or

∂ 2 Mx open section beam , b ) direct stress and shear flow system
wy = − on the element
∂z 2
 3

Equilibrium equations are Expressions used to calculate experimental re-

sults
∂q ∂σz
+t =0
∂s ∂z

∂q ∂σs
+t =0
∂z ∂s
here , q = τ t
the expression for qs is

Z s Z s
q(s) − q(0) = a txds − b tyds
0 0

 
Sx Ixx − Sy Ixy
a=− 2
Ixx Iyy − Ixy

and
 
Sy Iyy − Sx Ixy
b= 2
Ixx Iyy − Ixy

but for closed section ,

FIG. 6. cantilever schematic and notation

q(s) = qb + q0
Following formula es are used to calculate deflections
the value of q0 depends on point where shear load acts
and load intensity as well
F L3
   
1 1 1 1
u= + + cos(2θ) −
R qb
6E Ixx Iyy Iyy Ixx
− t ds
q0 = R ds
F L3
t
 
1 1
v= sin(2θ) −
To find shear center we balance the moment as the 6E Ixx Iyy
moment generated about any point due to the shear load
passing through shear center can be expressed as inte-
grated moment of shear flow throught the section

FIG. 5. Shear center

FIG. 7. Mohr’s circle for deflections

Z
From the Mohr’s circle , we calculate Values of I as
Sx η0 − Sy ϵ0 = p q ds follows :
 4

L3
Ixx =
3E(OC + R)

L3
Iyy =
3E(OC − R)

here length of beam is L = 470 mm , R is radius , E is

Young’s modulus .

IV. RESULTS

IV.1. Shear Center

FIG. 8. Shear Center of C Section

TABLE I. Observation Table of C Section

C Section
Eccentricity
Left-Hand Right-Hand
of Load
Indicator (mm) Indicator (mm)
(mm)
-25 2.4 0.61
-20 2.14 0.85
-15 1.91 0.93
-10 1.78 1.22
-5 1.51 1.49
0 1.46 1.77
5 1.32 2.07
10 1.08 2.39
15 0.85 2.53
20 0.54 2.69
25 0.24 3.31

TABLE II. Observation Table of L Section

L Section
FIG. 9. Shear Center of L Section
Eccentricity
Left-Hand Right-Hand
of Load
Indicator (mm) Indicator (mm)
(mm)
-25 4.17 0.8
-20 3.95 1.16
-15 3.54 1.69
-10 3.06 2
-5 2.68 2.1 TABLE III. Intersection Points of C Section
0 2.31 2.75 Intersection Points
5 1.9 3.3 C Section
10 0.89 3.52 x
-4.581 mm
15 0.68 3.34 (shear center)
20 0.84 3.44 y
1.567 mm
25 0.24 3.69 (Indicator)
 5

Head angle 67.5 ( C Channel )

TABLE IV. Intersection Points of L Section Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm )
Intersection Points 0 0 0 0.000 0.000
L Section 100 0.53 0.3 0.587 0.163
x 200 1.38 0.99 1.676 0.276
-2.246 mm
(shearc enter) 300 2.31 1.69 2.828 0.438
y 400 3.06 2.22 3.734 0.594
2.393 mm
(Indicator)
Displacement vs load at head angle 67.5 degree ( C channel )

TABLE V. Comparison of theoretical and experimental Shear

Center of C Section
Shear Center of Channel Section
Theoretical Shear Center -4.2 mm Head angle 90 ( C Channel )
Experimental Shear Center -4.581 mm Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm )
0 0 0 0.000 0.000
100 0.23 0.14 0.262 0.064
200 0.82 0.62 1.018 0.141
TABLE VI. Comparison of theoretical and experimental 300 1.46 1.15 1.846 0.219
Shear Center of L Section 400 1.96 1.56 2.489 0.283
Shear Center of L Section
Theoretical Shear Center -2.1 mm Displacement vs load at head angle 90 degree ( C channel )
Experimental Shear Center -2.246 mm

IV.2. Unsymmetrical bending of beam

Head angle 112.5 ( C Channel )

C channel
Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm )
Note : all head angles are in degrees.
0 0 0 0.000 0.000
100 0.34 0.24 0.410 0.071
Head angle 0 ( C Channel ) 200 0.85 0.62 1.039 0.163
Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm ) 300 1.6 1.15 1.945 0.318
0 0 0 0.000 0.000 400 2.27 1.66 2.779 0.431
100 0.43 0.27 0.495 0.113
200 0.87 0.81 1.188 0.042 Displacement vs load at θ = 112.5 degree ( C channel )
300 1.36 1.24 1.838 0.085
400 1.99 1.82 2.694 0.120

TABLE VII. Displacement vs load at head angle 0 degree

Head angle 135 ( C Channel )
Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm )
Head angle 22.5 ( C Channel ) 0 0 0 0.000 0.000
Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm ) 100 0.13 0.03 0.113 0.071
0 0 0 0.000 0.000 200 1.05 0.72 1.252 0.233
100 0.14 0.07 0.148 0.049 300 1.72 1.19 2.058 0.375
200 0.89 0.86 1.237 0.021 400 2.48 1.7 2.956 0.552
300 1.36 1.34 1.909 0.014
400 1.96 1.94 2.758 0.014 Displacement vs load at θ = 135 degree ( C channel )

Displacement vs load at head angle 22.5 degree ( C channel )

Head angle 45 ( C Channel ) Head angle 157.5 ( C Channel )

Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm ) Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm )
0 0 0 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0.000
100 0.2 0.17 0.262 0.021 100 0.21 0.09 0.212 0.085
200 0.74 0.75 1.054 -0.007 200 0.8 0.57 0.969 0.163
300 1.31 1.36 1.888 -0.035 300 1.47 1.06 1.789 0.290
400 1.81 1.87 2.602 -0.042 400 2.19 1.58 2.666 0.431

Displacement vs load at head angle 45 degree ( C channel ) Displacement vs load at θ = 157.5 degree ( C channel )
 6

Head angle 180 ( C Channel )

Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm )
0 0 0 0.000 0.000
100 0.11 0.09 0.141 0.085
200 0.69 0.53 0.863 0.163
300 1.39 1.21 1.838 0.290
400 2.15 1.89 2.857 0.431

Displacement vs load at θ = 180 degree ( C channel )

C shaped channel ( mm/kg )

point no θ dU/dP dV/dP FIG. 11.
1 0 6.7 0.2
2 22.5 7.3 0.007
3 45 6.8 0.1
4 67.5 9.7 -1.5
5 90 6.6 -0.7
6 112.5 7.1 -1.1
7 135 7.9 1.4
8 157.5 6.9 1.1
9 180 7.4 1.1

dv/dP vs du/dP for C channel

experimental ( L channel )
Ixx Iyy set of points ( perfect circle ) Radius OC
5.094E-10 7.37E-10 7 1 6 1.49 8.16
5.407E-10 7.67E-10 7 8 6 1.34 7.75

calculation of Moment of Inertia

FIG. 12.
experimental ( L channel )
Ixx Iyy set of points ( perfect circle ) Radius OC
5.094E-10 7.37E-10 7 1 6 1.49 8.16
5.407E-10 7.67E-10 7 8 6 1.34 7.75

calculation of Moment of Inertia ( L channel )

FIG. 10. FIG. 13.

 7

FIG. 14. FIG. 17.

FIG. 18.

FIG. 15.

FIG. 19.

L channel
Note : all head angles are in degrees.

Head angle 0 ( L Channel )

Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm )
0 0 0 0.000 0.000
100 1.93 1.29 2.277 0.453
200 2.93 1.64 3.231 0.912
300 4.17 2.35 4.610 1.287
400 5.96 3.3 6.548 1.881

FIG. 16. θ = 0 for L channel

 8

Head angle 22.5 ( L Channel ) Head angle 135 ( L Channel )

Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm ) Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm )
0 0 0 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0.000
100 2.38 2 3.097 0.269 100 0.17 0.17 0.240 0.000
200 4.37 3.55 5.600 0.580 200 0.76 0.75 1.068 0.007
300 6.39 5.06 8.096 0.940 300 1.41 1.33 1.937 0.057
400 7.78 5.49 9.383 1.619 400 1.98 1.84 2.701 0.099

θ = 22.5 for L channel θ = 135 for L channel

Head angle 157.5 ( L Channel )

Head angle 45 ( L Channel ) Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm )
Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm ) 0 0 0 0.000 0.000
0 0 0 0.000 0.000 100 1.29 0.63 1.358 0.467
100 0.17 1.02 0.841 -0.601 200 2.42 1.24 2.588 0.834
200 2.86 2.64 3.889 0.156 300 3.11 1.57 3.309 1.089
300 4.66 4.35 6.371 0.219 400 4.05 1.99 4.271 1.457
400 6.51 6.18 8.973 0.233
θ = 157.5 for L channel
θ = 45 for L channel

Head angle 180 ( L Channel )

Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm )
Head angle 67.5 ( L Channel ) 0 0 0 0.000 0.000
Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm ) 100 0.82 0.17 0.700 0.460
0 0 0 0.000 0.000 200 2.72 1.08 2.687 1.160
100 0.35 0.52 0.615 -0.120 300 4.36 1.79 4.349 1.817
200 2.04 2.95 3.528 -0.643 400 5.85 2.48 5.890 2.383
300 3.16 4.71 5.565 -1.096
400 4.48 6.73 7.927 -1.591 θ = 180 for L channel

θ = 67.5 for L channel

L shaped channel ( mm/kg )

point no θ dU/dP dV/dP
1 0 15.4 4.6
Head angle 90 ( L Channel )
2 22.5 23.8 3.9
Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm )
3 45 23.5 1.3
0 0 0 0.000 0.000
4 67.5 20.8 -4.2
100 0.18 0.44 0.438 -0.184
5 90 14.4 -5.5
200 0.88 2.04 2.065 -0.820
6 112.5 6.6 -1.9
300 1.6 3.69 3.741 -1.478
7 135 7.1 0.3
400 2.44 5.43 5.565 -2.114
8 157.5 10.5 3.5
9 180 15.4 6.1
θ = 90 for L channel
dv/dP for du/dP for L channel

Head angle 112.5 ( L Channel )

Load (gm) LR RR u ( mm ) v ( mm ) experimental ( L channel )
0 0 0 0.000 0.000 Ixx Iyy set of points ( perfect circle ) Radius OC
100 0.04 0 0.028 0.028 2.62E-10 8.03E-10 9 6 5 6.32 12.44
200 0.44 0.25 0.488 0.134 2.08E-10 4.46E-10 9 3 5 6.3 17.31
300 0.81 1.24 1.450 -0.304 2.09E-10 4.14E-10 9 3 4 5.83 17.69
400 1.29 2.38 2.595 -0.771 2.06E-10 4.09E-10 1 3 5 5.92 17.94

θ = 112.5 for L channel computation of I values for L channel

 9

FIG. 20. FIG. 23.

FIG. 24.
FIG. 21.

FIG. 22. FIG. 25.

 10

V. DISCUSSIONS

V.1. Shear Center

We can see that according to our expectations, the

shear center will be located at the point of intersection
of the left indicator and the right indicator because, the
shear center is located at a point where the torsion is
zero for the shear load applied. Thus we can see that
the experimental and the theoretical values of the shear
values also come nearly similar values.
FIG. 26.

V.2. Unsymmetrical bending of beam

We can see that the Mohr’s circle has been plotted for
the 2 beams and for the C section , 2 times Mohr’s circle
was made because the experimental points are not lying
on a perfect circle so sets of 3 points were chosen to plot
the perfect circle and thus I values were obtained for the
C section , comparison has been made with available I
values. and Ixx values are showing less deviation than
Iyy values.

FIG. 27.

VI. CONCLUSION

To conclude we can say that the values obtained from

experiment for both the 2 experiments were well close to
the theoretical values obtained from analytical expres-
sions and hence our experiment is successful, various val-
ues plotted against certain parameters also revel that the
values obtained are well under acceptable limits.

FIG. 28.
VII. REFERENCES

• Aircraft Structures by T.H.G Megson

• Engineering Mechanics of Solids by Egor Popov

• Analysis of aircraft structures by Bruce K Donald-

son

FIG. 29.