EGR 213 Materials

Thursday 2th, February 2017

DOE Project No. 1 Report
Stress-Strain Curve Test
By Ignacio Catalan (Group 5)

Objective: The purpose of this DOE project is to research a material to find its properties and
use those properties to predict the shape of the stress strain curve, then compare it to the stress
strain curve acquired through practical testing of the material chosen and interpret the physical
significance of these results.

Experiment: A stress/strain curve is a graph that shows the connection between the stress and
strain of a specific material. This curve will be unique for every material. The curve is generated
from measuring the strain of the material during specific points as it undergoes tensile or
compressive stress. This experiment will include putting a material under tensile stress. From the
stress-strain curve generated the properties of the material will be connected and compared to the
stress-strain curve.

The materials used for this test will be 3 pieces of low carbon steel, tensile test machine, and a
computer. Acquire at least three pieces of low carbon steel (0.75 W x 4" x 0.06 thk.). Research
the properties of this material and record them. From there, test each material under tensile stress
and acquire the stress strain curve for each. Find the key points on the curve such as the
proportional limit, the elastic limit, the yield point, and the ultimate strength for each trial. Take
an average of the points found on the curves and use these measurements to calculate the average
material properties. Compare the properties researched with those acquired from the stress-strain
curves. They should be correlated to each other. This will show that the stress strain curve of a
material can be very useful in measuring a material's properties for the design of engineering
applications.
Of special attention is the proportional limit in the stress strain curve in each of the trials, since
after this point the material has failed for all practical purposes.
Data &Analysis:

Figure 1: Tensile specimens used for the experiment, from left to right they are specimens #1, #2
& #3. They are 0.75 W x 4" x 0.06 thk low carbon Steel pieces. The gauge length used was 2

inches (black pen marks on the samples) with 1 inch in each side used to grab the samples to the
testers grips. Notice how all samples broke at approximately the same place, indicating the
consistency of the test. Notice how specimen #2 (in the middle) shows some bending at the
fracture point, this type of twisting is to be avoided because it puts the material in more than one
type of stress, this can be seen by looking at Table 1 where almost all the values for specimen #2
are lower than for the other, indicating that less force was required because more than one type
of force was being applied.
Figure 2: Specimen 1 Stress Strain Curve.

Figure 3: Specimen 2 Stress Strain Curve.

 Figure 4: Specimen 3 Stress Strain Curve.

Table 1: Tensile Test Results.

Speci Pea Pea Brea Break Yiel

men k k k Elonga d
Numb Loa Stre Stre tion Stre
er d ss ss (%) ss
(Lb) (PSI (PSI (PSI
) ) )
1 3253 7229 6427 38.6 7226
.26 4.7 8 7.3
2 2995 6657 5129 40.8 6657
.85 4.5 3.2 4.5
3 3033 6741 5750 39.1 6741
.81 8.1 1.1 8.1
Avera 3094 6876 5769 39.5 6875
ge .31 2.4 0.8 3.3
All specimens have a gauge length of 2 inches, a width of 0.75 inches and a thickness of 0.06
inches.

Predicted Force Calculation:

F F
= 48000 psi= F=2160lbs
A 0.75 W0.06 thick .

Figure 5: From the stress strain graphs the proportional limit, yield strength and tensile strength
forces are averaged. This is specimens 1 graph, the same is done for all graphs.

Table 2: Forces (Lbs) obtained from stress strain graphs.

Specimen Proportional Yield Strength Tensile strength

Number limit (Lbs) (Lbs) (From
(Lbs) Testers
spreadsheet)
1 2100 2600 3253.26
2 2050 2350 2995.85
 3 2200 2300 3033.81
Average 2116.7 2416.7 3094.31

Then this average of the forces is divided by the cross sectional area to obtain the psi values.
Then they are compared to the proposed values.

Table 3: Published (Book) and Practical results of stress-strain test.

Published Practical % Difference
Proportional limit 33358 47037.8 41%
(psi)
Yield strength (psi) 34000 53704.4 58%
Tensile strength 48000 68762.4 30%
(psi)
Force (lbs) 2160 2566.67 19%

These results indicate a great % difference between the published (& proposed) values and the
practical values obtained from the experiment. After careful analysis of the information, it was
found that one of the original assumptions about the material was incorrect. The term Low
Carbon Steel is vague in itself, for example, how much is low? And knowing that the amount
of carbon determines the strength of the steel (more carbon makes it stronger), it was concluded
that the published information does not correspond to the specific low carbon composition of the
samples used on the experiment. And by comparing the practical and published results one can
conclude that the steel of the samples is stronger than the ones on the book, so they have a higher
composition of carbon. So the Low Carbon from the book is not the one we were testing.
After additional research it was found that the closest match to the practical values is 1018
mild/low carbon steel that contains around .05-.25% of Carbon. These values were obtained from
Azo Materials (Azom.com).

Table 3: Published (Website) and Practical results of stress-strain test.

 Published (Website) Practical % Difference
Proportional limit No data* 47037.8 -
(psi)
Yield strength (psi) 53700 53704.4 0.0082 %
Tensile strength 63800 68762.4 7.78 %
(psi)
Force (lbs) 2871 2566.67 10.6 %

*It is interesting (but not surprising) that no information is provided for the proportional limit,
since after this point the material is useless, and yet it is deemed irrelevant by publishers.

Conclusion: The experiment shows that even though the samples were obtained from the same
source and even cut from the same rod, they all exhibited different characteristics. This shows
that any published value should never be considered completely accurate, since they are based on
averages, and in real life these values may be higher or lower.

After averaging the values of 3 samples these were compared to published values from a book
and from a website. The practical values did not match the predicted values because the % of
carbon in the steel from the book was different from the samples. They did match the values
from the website, and it was found that the steel was 1018 mild/low carbon steel. This shows
how the material properties of low carbon steel can vary due to the range of carbon allowed in
each piece produced, so Low Carbon Steel is a vague name that can mean a great range of
carbon compositions.

The difference between published and practical values can be explained by a few reasons. As it
was mentioned, the material properties depend on the percentage of carbon, and this percentage
is not consistent for every rod made, it was found that its not even the same for pieces of the
same rod! Also, the manufacturing process and methods to produce the steel can vary from
manufacturer to manufacturer, affecting the consistency between them. Maybe less importantly,
the pieces were not cut into the usual dog-bond shape used in tensile testing.

In this DOE it was shown how a stress-strain curve can be used to determine a materials
properties. This curve indicates the range of loads in which the material can be safely subjected
to before deforming and ultimately breaking. This helps the engineer in the design of structures
to choose the right material for the right job.