1

Tensile Test Experiment

ME 3228: Materials and Mechanics Lab

Section: 519

Tyler Myers

Due: March 6th, 2014

Turn in to: Cargi M, Bakirci

2

Summary

For the Tensile Test Experiment, data was collected from using an MTS machine

and lab computer. The data collected was the position and load of what was going on

to a sample material. The materials used were two different types of aluminum and

steel. The simple tensile test was performed on each of the four samples. With the

data found in the experiment, calculations of stress and strain were done, finding the

different material properties of the four samples. With the stress and strain values,

graphs were created to illustrate the experiment, and with those graphs some of the

material properties were directly found. The material properties consisted of

elasticity, yield and ultimate strengths, resilience, toughness, percentage of

elongation, and percentage of reduction in area of the samples. As for most of the

material properties, having to have been calculated, charts were drawn up for the

comparison of the experimental data to the real world reference data provided by any

common engineering book. Details of the experiment and its results will be provided

later in the report, along with all the tables and graphs generated from the

experiment’s data.

3

Table of Contents

List of Figures ________________________________________________________4

List of Tables ________________________________________________________5

List of Equations ________________________________________________________6

Summary ________________________________________________________2

Introduction ________________________________________________________7

Theory ________________________________________________________7

Test Description ________________________________________________________9

Results ________________________________________________________11

Discussion ________________________________________________________20

Conclusion ________________________________________________________21

References ________________________________________________________22

Appendix ________________________________________________________23

4

List of Figures

Figure 1: Tensile Test in Action 7

Figure 2: The MTS Machine 10

Figure 3: Four Different Sample Materials 10

Figure 4: The Stress-Strain Graph of ASIS 1018 12

Figure 5: The Stress-Strain Graph of AISI 1045 12

Figure 6: The Stress-Strain Graph of Al 6061 13

Figure 7: The Stress-Strain Graph of Al 7075 13

Figure 8: The .2% Offset Graph of AISI 1018 14

Figure 9: The .2% Offset Graph of AISI 1045 14

Figure 10: The .2% Offset Graph of Al 6061 15

Figure 11: The .2% Offset Graph of Al 7075 15

Figure 12: The Young’s Modulus Graph of AISI 1018 16

Figure 13: The Young’s Modulus Graph of AISI 1045 17

Figure 14: The Young’s Modulus Graph of AL 6061 17

Figure 15: The Young’s Modulus Graph of Al 7075 18

Figure 16: The Elasticity Comparison Chart 19

Figure 17: The Yield Strength Comparison Chart 19

Figure 18: The Ultimate Strength Comparison Chart 20

Figure 19: The Comparison between Ductile and Brittle Fractures 21

5

List of Tables

Table 1: Initial and Final Measurements of the Sampled Material 11

Table 2: Experimental Mechanical Properties of Four Samples 23

Table 3: The Comparison Table between the Experimental and Referenced Data 23

6

List of Equations

Equation 1: The Stress Equation

𝜎 =𝐹

𝐴𝑜

Equation 2: The Strain Equation

𝜀 =𝑙−𝑙0

𝑙0

Equation 3: The Elasticity Equation

𝐸 =∆𝜎

∆𝜀

Equation 4: Ultimate Strength Equation

𝜎𝑢 = 𝐹𝑚/𝐴0

Equation 5: Resilience Equation

𝑈𝑟 =1

2 𝜎𝑦 ∗ 𝜀𝑦

Equation 6: Toughness Equation

𝑈𝑇 =1

2∗ (𝜎𝑦 + 𝜎𝑢) ∗ 𝜀𝑓

Equation 7: Percentage of Elongation

𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝐸𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 =∆𝑙

𝑙0∗ 100%

Equation 8: Percentage of Reduction in Area

𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 =∆𝐴

𝐴0∗ 100%

7

Introduction

This experiment consisted of measuring the mechanical properties of two

different types of materials using a tensile testing machine. The purpose of this

experiment is to recreate a real world application of what these materials might be

subjected to when the materials are put to work. These experiments are done often

to construct a set of data for all engineers to be able to have quick access to correct

information and material specifications and properties. So with this type of

experiment, the elastic modulus, the ultimate strength, and the yield strength can be

calculated and compared to old references from previous experiments to see how the

material properties have changed, if any. The two materials being tested in this

experiment will be steel and aluminum. Those two types of materials have also been

split into two sub-types: Steel: 1018 and 1045, Al: 7075 and 6061.

Theory

The idea of this tensile test experiment is to calculate the specific material

properties from each material tested and see how they compare to a standard

reference of the same material’s properties already provided in the real world. Below

is a snap shot of an actual tensile test being taken on a sample material.

Figure 1: Tensile Test in Action

8

The specific properties the experiment will provide will be elasticity, yield and

ultimate strengths, resilience, toughness, percentage of elongation, and percentage

of reduction in area of the samples. Finding these will have to come from finding the

tensile stress of the experiment being performed. The tensile stress, σ, is calculated

through this equation:

𝜎 =𝐹

𝐴𝑜 (Equ. 1)

Where F is the load being applied and A0 is the original cross-sectional area at the gage

section of the sample. Then the strain, ε, is also needed for calculations purposes to

measure what is being done to the sample in terms of it being stretched out. The

engineering strain is calculated by:

𝜀 =𝑙−𝑙0

𝑙0 (Equ. 2)

Here, l is the new gage length and l0 is the original gage length. With the calculations

of both the stress and strain of the sample, a Stress vs. Strain graph can then be created

to see how the sample acts while the tensile test is being performed. After setting up

a proper stress-strain graph, the calculation of the modulus of elasticity, E, can be

found using the simple slope definition:

𝐸 =∆𝜎

∆𝜀 (Equ. 3)

With the elasticity, obtaining the yield strength is done by performing a .2% offset on

the stress-strain graph, and figuring out where the two lines intersect. The Ultimate

tensile strength, σu, is found by:

𝜎𝑢 = 𝐹𝑚/𝐴0 (Equ. 4)

With Fm being the maximum load applied to the sample. Resilience, or the energy

absorbed by the sample when it is being deformed elastically, is found by using:

𝑈𝑟 =1

2 𝜎𝑦 ∗ 𝜀𝑦 (Equ. 5)

9

Where σy is the yield strength and εy is the strain at which the yield strength is located

for the sample. Finding the toughness, UT, can be found by:

𝑈𝑇 =1

2∗ (𝜎𝑦 + 𝜎𝑢) ∗ 𝜀𝑓 (Equ. 6)

The strain level at fracture is represented by εf. Ductility, or the ability of the sample

to be deformed before complete fracture, can be measured by the percentage of

elongation:

𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝐸𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 =∆𝑙

𝑙0∗ 100% (Equ. 7)

A material with a lower ductility can be classified as brittle, and a material with high

density can be classified as ductile. Also the percentage of area reduction is another

form of measuring the ductility of the material. This can be calculated by:

𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 =∆𝐴

𝐴0∗ 100% (Equ. 8)

Here, Ao is the original cross-sectional area of the sample. With all these properties

coming from a simple tensile test, there can be a lot said about different types of

materials when the test is completed.

Test Description

This test will consist of experimenting on four different types of materials using a

MTS tensile testing machine, shown below.

10

Figure 2: The MTS Machine

The samples being tested in this experiment are AISI 1018, AISI 1045, Aluminum 6061-

T6, Aluminum 7075-T24.

Figure 3: Four Different Sample Materials

11

During the Tensile Test experiment, the four samples were measured for their original

gage length and diameters. Each sample was then put in and clamped down by the

upper and lower hydraulic grips. Then using the lab computer, the MTS machine was

activated, calibrated, and began pulling the sample down with the lower grip while the

upper grip remained stationary. During this, the computer stores the data of the

position of the grips, and the load that is being applied to the sample at the current

time. The sample was then pulled until fracture. Once fracture was reached, the

machine was deactivated. The sample was then measured once more for its final gage

length and diameters.

Results

The first thing in this experiment was to document the initial gage length and

diameters of the sample, immediately following fracture of the sample, the final gage

length and diameters were taken.

Table 1: Initial and Final Measurements of the Sampled Material

Sample

Gage Diameter Gage Length Cross-Sectional

(cm) (cm) Area (cm)

Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final

1018 0.64 0.44 4.05 4.37 0.32 0.15

1045 0.64 0.48 4.13 4.43 0.32 0.18

6061 0.63 0.55 4.08 4.82 0.31 0.24

7075 0.64 0.58 4.19 4.48 0.32 0.26

After the experiment, calculations to find the stress and strain were done on each

sample. With those stress and strain values, a Stress-Strain graph was created per

sample. Shown next are the four samples Stress-Strain graphs.

12

Figure 4: The Stress-Strain Graph of ASIS 1018

Figure 5: The Stress-Strain Graph of AISI 1045

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

-0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12

Stre

ss (

Pa)

Stain

Stress vs Strain Graph, 1018

Exp. Data

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

-0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12

Stes

s (M

Pa)

Strain

Stress vs Stain Graph , 1045

Exp. Data

13

Figure 6: The Stress-Strain Graph of Al 6061

Figure 7: The Stress-Strain Graph of Al 7075

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

-0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25

Stre

ss (

MP

a)

Strain

Stress vs Strain Graph, 6061

Exp. Data

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12

Stre

ss (

MP

a)

Strain

Stress vs Strain Graph, 7075

Exp. Data

14

With the Stress-Strain graphs generated per sample, a .2% Offset graph was created to

find the values of the yield strength of the samples.

Figure 8: The .2% Offset Graph of AISI 1018

Figure 9: The .2% Offset Graph of AISI 1045

-100

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

-0.002 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02

Stre

ss (

MP

a)

Stain

.2% Offset Graph, 1018

Exp. Data

.2% offest

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

-0.002 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018

Stre

ss (

MP

a)

Strain

.2 % Offset Graph, 1045

Exp. Data

.2% Offset

15

Figure 10: The .2% Offset Graph of Al 6061

Figure 11: The .2% Offset Graph of Al 7075

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

-0.005 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035

Stre

ss (

MP

a)

Strain

.2% Offset Graph, 6061

Exp. Data

.2% Offset

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045

Stre

ss (

MP

a)

Strain

.2% Offset Graph, 7075

Exp. Data

.2% Offset

16

To do so, a simple calculation of Young’s Modulus had to be done in order to find, E,

the elasticity of the sample to create the .2% Offset Graph. The Young’s Modulus was

calculated by finding the slope of the original data of stress and strain using up to the

first one hundred to two hundred megapascals of stress for ease of finding the

equation of the line. The following four graphs illustrate the linear relationship of the

Young’s Modulus for the samples.

Figure 12: The Young’s Modulus Graph of AISI 1018

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

-0.0005 0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002 0.0025 0.003 0.0035

Stre

ss (

MP

a)

Strain

Young's Modulus Graph, 1018

Exp. Data

Linear (Exp. Data)

17

Figure 13: The Young’s Modulus Graph of AISI 1045

Figure 14: The Young’s Modulus Graph of AL 6061

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

-0.0005 0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002 0.0025

Stre

ss (

MP

a)

Strain

Young's Modulus Graph, 1045

Exp. Data

Linear (Exp. Data)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

-0.001 0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006

Stre

ss (

MP

a)

Strain

Young's Modulus Graph, 6061

Exp. Data

Linear (Exp. Data)

18

Figure 15: The Young’s Modulus Graph of Al 7075

With the all the data taken from the stress-strain graphs, a comparison of the

experimental elasticity, yield strength, and ultimate strength of the four individual

samples were taken to a reference data provided by common engineering charts used

on an everyday basis. Here is a comparison of the elasticity for each of the four

samples.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002 0.0025

Stre

ss (

MP

a)

Strain

Young's Modulus Graph, 7075

Exp. Data

Linear (Exp. Data)

19

Figure 16: The Elasticity Comparison Chart

Next is the comparison of the Yield strengths for the four samples.

Figure 17: The Yield Strength Comparison Chart

57.4 61.2

38.7 33.1

205 200

68.9 71.7

0

50

100

150

200

250

1018 1045 6061 7075

Elasticity (GPa)

Exp. Ref.

400 387

230

284

370

310276

503

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1018 1045 6061 7075

Yield Strength (MPa)

Exp. Ref.

20

Lastly, illustrated below is the comparison of the Ultimate Strengths of the four

samples.

Figure 18: The Ultimate Strength Comparison Chart

Discussion

There appears to be a clear difference between the two steel and the two

aluminum materials upon completion of the results for the experiment. When talking

about the two steel materials, AISI 1045 shows a clear difference in its ability to hold a

greater force when compared to the AISI 1018. Its ultimate strength is greater, but its

yield strength is lower. AISI 1045 also has a greater elasticity, meaning it is less brittle.

When comparing the two aluminum materials, the Al 7075’s yield and ultimate

strengths are higher than the Al 6061. But the elasticity of the Al 6061 is greater than

the Al 7075 as far as the experimental data, but in a perfect analysis, the Al 7075 should

have a greater elasticity, meaning that the Al 6061 is less ductile than the Al 7075.

Looking at the aluminum and steel materials together, even from the tensile test

experimental data, the steel’s properties of elasticity, yield and ultimate strengths are

far beyond those of the aluminums. Which makes sense knowing that the steel should

be far more brittle and the aluminum more ductile. With being more brittle, the steel

785

1105

568618

440

565

310

572

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1018 1045 6061 7075

Ultimate Strength (Mpa)

Exp. Ref.

21

should come out fractured with a more of a flat break, and the aluminum being more

ductile, should come out with a more slanted break.

Figure 19: The Comparison between Ductile and Brittle Fractures

Conclusion

The tensile test made it easy to see first-hand what would happen to different

types of material when under a tensile load. Having not been able to perform anything

like this before, the test made a connection from the conceptual schoolwork to the

physical application. The data achieved seemed a bit off, most likely due to some

physical and mechanical error while undertaking the experiment. Overall, the tensile

test was enjoyable.

22

References

1. Chaudhuri, Jharna, 2014. Material and Mechanics Laboratory Experiments,

Texas Tech University, Cognella, INC., United States of America

23

Appendix

Table 2: Experimental Mechanical Properties of Four Samples

Table 3: The Comparison Table between the Experimental and Referenced Data

Sample

Yield Yield

%Error

Ultimate Ultimate

%Error Elasticity Elasticity

%Error Strength Strength Strength Strength

Exp. Ref. Exp. Ref. Exp. Ref.

1018 400 Mpa

370 Mpa

8% 785 Mpa

440 Mpa

78% 57.4 Gpa

205 Gpa 72%

1045 387 Mpa

310 Mpa

25% 1105 Mpa

565 Mpa

96% 61.2 Gpa

200 Gpa 70%

6061 230 Mpa

276 Mpa

17% 568 Mpa

310 Mpa

83% 38.7 Gpa

68.9 Gpa

44%

7075 284 Mpa

503 Mpa

44% 618 Mpa

572 Mpa

8% 33.1 Gpa

71.7 Gpa

54%

Sample Elastic Modulus Yield Strength Ultimate Strength Modulus of Resillence Toughness Percentage of Percentage of Reduction

(Gpa) (Mpa) (Mpa) (Pa) (Mpa) Elongation In Area

1018 57.4 400 785 1.89 89.5 7.90% 53%

1045 61.2 387 1105 1.6 79.8 7.30% 44%

6061 38.7 230 568 0.92 79.8 18.10% 24%

7075 33.1 284 618 1.62 45.1 6.90% 18%