2- The longitudinal extension of metal bar in direction of an applied force is
given by
y = LKeF×1×10−3
Where y is the longitudinal extension in m, L is the length of the bar in m which
is L= 0.15 (m), K is a constant depends on the material and is K= 1, and F is applied
force in N.
a) Find the work done if the force increases from 100 N to 500 N using:
i) An analytical integration technique
ii) A numerical integration technique (n=8 intervals)
[Note: the work done is given by the area under the curve]
b) Using a computer spreadsheet and recalculates step (ii) by increasing
the number of intervals to n=10 and compare your obtained results
with (i) and (ii)
c) Using Simpson’s rule to find the work done (n=8).
d) Analyse whether the size of numerical steps has effect on the obtained
result and explain why.
1 STEP. Substitute all the constants that we know
2 STEP. We will deal with the work done. As we know, work is equal to force multiplied by displacement, in our case angling.
3 STEP. Part (a.i)
Let's deal with integration
4 STEP. Part (a.ii)
1. Since no specific method of numerical integration is indicated, I will use the trapezoidal method.
2. In order not to increase the amount of work, I will attach all calculations in the form of an Excel table at the end of the solution, and I will only insert screenshots into the solution itself.
3.The integration formula by the trapezoid method has the form
More information :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trapezoidal_rule
Conclusion,
5 STEP. Part (b)
Conclusion,
As we can see
6 STEP. Part (c)
The integration formula by the Simpson's rule has the form
More information : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_rule
Conclusion,
7 STEP. Part (d)
Since the rule of trapeziums and Simpson's formula have different orders of accuracy:
then it is advisable to compare only part(a.ii) and part(b).
We see that there is an increase in inaccuracy
But this increase is insignificant. This can be explained by the fact that the specified function "W(F)=F\\cdot e^{F}" grows too quickly and the division of the integration segment into 8 or 10 parts is too rough. Therefore, the numerical values differ by an order of magnitude from the analytical solution.
Note : calculation table
Comments
Leave a comment