Tensile Test

KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
INDEX NO.
TENSILE TEST TO FAILURE ON MILD STEEL
AIM
TO OBTAIN A LOAD – EXTENSION CURVE FOR MILD STEEL UNDER TENSION
TO FAILURE
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this experiment is to investigate the behavior of two material specimens under a
Tensile Test. The materials to be investigated are Copper and Steel. From performing the Tensile
Test
the following properties will be determined; young’s modulus, yield stress, ultimate tensile
stress,
percentage elongation at fracture, percentage reduction in cross-sectional area at fracture and
fracture stress. This experiment is used to determine a material’s properties, and is used in a wide
range of industries. One example of this could be to determine the Ultimate Tensile Stress of a
material to be used for a shopping bag, to check it can hold enough weight.
APPARATUS
 Avery hydraulic testing machine
 Batty extensometer
 Vernier calipers
 Sample of mild steel
PROCEDURE
1. By use of Vernier caliper, the thickness and the width of the sample was measured. The
gauge length of the specimen was determined.
2. A ruler was used to measure and confirm the gauge length of the sample.
3. Set the scale readings on the Avery hydraulic testing machine to zero.
4. Place the specimen inside the Avery hydraulic testing machine and adjust the jaws to fit
the size of the specimen. This was followed by attaching the extensometers on the
reduced sections of the gauge specimen.
5. To avoid slipping of the specimen, the scroll wheel was used in preloading the machine.
6. After the specimen was removed, the extensometer was adjusted to zero values and the
test commenced to measure the strain of the specimen.
7. The data was recorded
8. By placing the sample in the Avery hydraulic testing machine, the tensile test was
conducted and results were recorded.
DIAGRAM
EQUIPMENT AND METHOD

The two specimens will take the form of a threaded rod with a length of 81.42mm and a diameter
of
6.03mm. The test will be performed by placing the two specimens under a “Lloyd test machine”.
The
machine will provide a threaded attachment to connect the specimens. The machine will exert a
tensile force on the specimen causing it to extend. The force exerted to create each increment of
extension is displayed on the machine along with the
total extension. For this test the force exerted for
every 0.5mm increment of extension will be recorded.
RESULTS
The Stress–Strain relationships of the two specimens
are shown in fig.2. The values for the ultimate tensile
stress for the Steel and Copper sample are 536MPa
and 445MPa respectively. The Yield Stress for copper
is not clearly represented by the graph as it shows the
material yielding gradually, but it could be estimated
to be at 200MPa by using a 0.1% proof stress. The
Yield Stress for steel occurs at 500MPa. The Elastic
Modulus for the Steel and Copper samples as
calculated from using the Yield Stresses stated
previously are both 14.5GPa. Fig.3 shows that after the
experiment the Steel sample had elongated 3.5% and
the cross sectional area at the point of fracture had
decreased by 53.1%. The Copper elongated 6.5%, and
the cross sectional area at the point of fracture
decreased by 25.9%
showed a very rapid transition between the decreased area and the rest of its length, whereas the
Copper showed a gradual transition. Necking is a property of a ductile material.
Referring to Engineering Materials (2) the Yield Stress’s for Copper is 60MPa, compared to the
200MPa value that was obtained experimentally. The difference between these results suggest
that; a)
The yield stress for copper that was predicted using a proof stress may of given an inaccurate
answer
that is higher than the real value b) The stress-stain results that were read from the machine were
inacurate. One innacuracy is that the experiment used the ‘nominal stress’ of the sample rather
than
the ‘true stress’. However, the difference between the two are very small, particuarly in the
elastic
region of the test, and could not cause such a large difference between the experimental and
theoretial
value of yield stress. This would mean the difference is more likely to be caused by (a) and that
very
little confidence can be placed on determining the yield stress with one run of an experiment and
by
detemining the yield stress using the graph. The experimental value for the Yield Stress of Steel
is
within the theoretical range of value which is between 260MPa and 1300MPa (2). Because this
value
was more clearly defined on the graph than it was for copper and it was not derived using a proof
stress, it would be expected to be more accurate and could have a high confidence placed on it.
The values for the Modulus of Elasticity obtained experimentally are around one order of
magnitude
smaller than values stated in Engineering Materials 1 (1) which quotes it to be 200GPa for mild
Steel
and 124GPa for Copper. Determining the Modulus of a material using a uni-axial tensile Stress
experiment is generally regarded as being inaccurate and is instead commonly determined by
measuring the natural frequency of a sample using an oscillation test (1). The reasons for this
are;
_ Recording small displacements of the sample is imprecise due to the measuring equipment (1).
_ Factors such as creep can contribute to the strain (1).
_ When exerting large forces the equipment can begin to flex, and the displacement of the
machine
is mistakenly read as a displacement of the sample.
The ultimate tensile stresses recorded are very close to the theoretical values, which are 400Mpa
and
500-1880MPa for copper and Carbon Steel Alloy (1),
The difference between the experimental and theoretical values for the Modulus suggests that in
this
case, very little confidence could be made with the results.
In conclusion, copper can be regarded as a more Ductile material than steel with a higher
Toughness,
and Steel can be considered to have a higher Yield and Tensile Strength with an equal elastic
Modulus.
REFERENCES
1) Ashby, M. (2006). Engineering Materials 1: An Introduction to Properties, Applications
and Design. 3rd ed. Butterworth-Heinemann
2) Hibbeler, R.C. (2004). Statics and Mechanics of Materials. Prentice Hall.
3) Tarr, M. (no date). Stress and its effect on Materials [online]. Available from

Tensile Test

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tensile Test

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tensile Test

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

EQUIPMENT AND METHOD

You might also like