Introduction:

The purpose of this lab was to apply the tensile test for two different materials (steel and
aluminum) in order to determine the stress-strain relationship in them. Also the yield strength,
tensile strength, the changes in length and area, Young’s Modulus and rupture stress were
determined too. The material samples used were A36 Steel and 6061-T6 Aluminum.
Regarding the engineering applications related to this lab, we found out that this test is
usually use in order to choose which material is better when you are planning to built
something. Also, by performing this lab, we were able to see that steel is stronger than
aluminum when a tensile test is applied to them.
Procedure:
The tensile test was applied for both materials.

1. By the use of Vernier Caliper, the diameter of the materials was measured, and with this the
cross-sectional area was calculated.

2. Then, the extensometer was installed in the material sample, and to marks was drawn in
the material in order to know the corresponding position of each leg of the extensometer. It
was put in the sample before mounting it in the machine.

3. The total length was measured (Lt), and the distance between the two marks of the legs of
the extensometer two. These values were used in future calculations.

4. Take the extensometer off and install the specimen in the testing machine.

5. Later, the extensometer was installed back, and the safety pin was used to position the
extensometer. Check that its legs are over the previous marks. If the legs don't match the
marks, the safety pin has to be removed and adjusted carefully. When the extensometer is
in position, the safety pin has to be removed.

6. Verify the connection between the extensometer and the transducer in order to obtain the
correct displacement values.

7. Verify that the load cell and the transducer are connected correctly. Load values will be
obtained.

8. Recheck that the safety pin is removed.

9. The transducers must be calibrated by the Lab instructor.

10. Now the material is ready for the tensile test. However, verify that the material sample is
properly installed, and that both jaws a securely tightened before the machine is turned on.

11. Apply a load slowly to the tensile material at approximately 500 lb per minute or less in
order to represent a static load case. The lab instructor will initially open the hydraulic
circuit in the machine and set the proper loading rate because this operation is critical. Later
when the initial speed is set constant, a student will be allowed to adjust the hydraulic
circuit to keep the rate constant.

12. Record the load values from the transducer connected to the load cell and deflection from
the transducer connected to the extensometer. It is necessary that some students per
group to record the reading as they are announced.
13. Continue loading of the sample until failure occurs, and then remove the sample from the
machine.

14. Measure the new diameter at the point of failure. With this value, the new area and
percent of reduction of the cross-sectional area will be calculated.

15. By putting the pieces together, measure the distances between the fillets with the caliper.

16. Sketch the fracture appearance.

17. Calculate the stress values using the applied loads and the original area. Also, calculate the
strain by using the deflection recorded from the extensometer and the initial length.

18. Plot the stress-strain curve.

Equipment:
 Metal Specimen ( aluminum and steel)
 Extensometer
 Two Transducers
 Universal Testing Machine
 Calipers

Extensometer

Universal
Testing
Machine
Transducers

Steel Sample

Aluminum
Sample
Discussion:

Engineering stress-strain curve is used rather than a true stress-strain curve because
useful properties (yield strength, modulus of elasticity, and others) of the material can be found
before the ultimate strength point of the graph due to that it is assumed that the cross-
sectional area remains remain constant so the jumps of variations can be seen easily, and in
those jumps the material properties can be easily recognize. However, when you use a true
stress strain graph the sample cross sectional area is not assumed to be constant, causing that
at the end the fracture strength will be large than the ultimate strength. By this, they will differ
from the normal or engineering stress-strain graph especially towards the breaking point where
the cross-sectional area has decreased (necking), causing to see the rupture stress of this graph
above the ultimate one, but in the normal graph this value will be below.
The value of true stress at the fracture point will be determined by dividing the final
applied load at that point, by the new area (which was smaller than the original one). For the
A36 Steel Sample, the true stress value was 90,223.89 psi, while that for the 6061-T6 Aluminum
sample was 56,897.3 psi. Also, this true stress value will be larger than the yield and ultimate
strength of the material.
In a force displacement curve, the area under it will represent the work done in the
specimen. However, in the stress and strain curve, the area under it will represent the work per
unit volume of material required to deform or fracture the material. With this, we will know
the energy required to fracture or deformed it, and with this information can be used to select
the material need for the design and construction of the building because we will know how
much energy it could absorb.
In elastic strain, the applied load to the material will cause deformation to it, but after that
load is taken away, the material will return to its original form. On the other hand, a plastic
strain is the deformation that the material has after a load is applied; however, in this case
when the load is taken away, the deformation stays and the material is not able to return to its
original position.
 During this lab, we were able to see that both materials presented a ductile failure
because both of them presented a deformation, and after some point they broke or presented
a fracture. The samples of steel and aluminum after being applied some load to them; they
began stretching, and then break down into two pieces.
In order to know if the results we obtained in this lab were correct or close to the
reality, we had to find the theoretical values for the yield strength, ultimate strength and
modulus of elasticity for the sample materials used (A36 Steel and 6061-T6 Aluminum). The
following table contains the experimental and theoretical values for the steel and aluminum
samples. References values were taken from the Mechanics of Materials book, and the
Materials for Civil and Construction Engineers book (see appendix for references).

A36 Steel Theoretical Value Experimental Value Percent Difference

Yield Strength (psi) 36,000 63,141.3 75.39251

Ultimate Strength 50,000 – 80,000 64,112.71 -1.36506

(psi)
Modulus of Elasticity 29,000,000 46,672,185 60.93857

(psi)
Note: Theoretical value for the Ultimate Strength used for the calculations of percent difference was 65,000 psi
(midpoint of the interval)

6061-T6 Aluminum Theoretical Value Experimental Value Percent Difference

Ultimate Strength 45,000 45,196.39 0.436422222

(psi)
Modulus of Elasticity 11,000,000 15,422,103 40.20093636

(psi)

After looking and comparing the theoretical and experimental values for both
materials samples (A36 Steel and 6061-T6 Aluminum), we can appreciate that the steel values
(ultimate and yield strength, and modulus of elasticity) are far away to be close to the
theoretical values, and being just the ultimate strength between the intervals given (using
65,000 psi as reference, the percent difference was -1.36%). The percent difference for yield
strength and modulus of elasticity for A36 Steel were 75.39% and 60.94 %.
Regarding the aluminum sample, the results obtained were more reasonable, but not
close enough to the real ones. The percent difference was 6.408% for the yield strength,
0.436% for the ultimate strength, and 40.208 % for the modulus of elasticity.

On this experiment there was intrinsic and systematic error caused by the machines used (it
was kind of old), and also observational errors regarding the reading of the values on the
transducers by the persons in this lab. Something that we noticed is that the steel and
aluminum samples broke close to one of their ends, and this maybe be caused by the way they
were created. In order to improve this, the machines should be change for some more recent
ones. By looking at the results obtained, we can see that these errors had a great influence on
the differences between the theoretical and experimental values for yield strength, ultimate
strength and modulus of elasticity for the samples of A36 Steel and 6061-T6 Aluminum.
Conclusion:

For this lab, we tested two different samples (A36 steel and 6061-T6 Aluminum) for a
tensile test. With this, we were able to obtain stress and strain values, and used to them to
obtain stress vs. strain curves graphs. Also, from this experiment, we were able to determine
the yield strength, rupture strength and percent of areas reduction for each material. Then, we
were able to compare them to their theoretical values in order to see if they were closed or
reasonable. The following tables contain values regarding A36 steel and 6061-T6 Aluminum of
yield strength, ultimate strength, modules of elasticity and their corresponding percent
differences.

A36 Steel Theoretical Value Experimental Value Percent Difference

Yield Strength (psi) 36,000 63,141.3 75.39251

Ultimate Strength 50,000 – 80,000 64,112.71 -1.36506

(psi)
Modulus of Elasticity 29,000,000 46,672,185 60.93857

(psi)
Note: Theoretical value for the Ultimate Strength used for the calculations of percent difference was 65,000 psi
(midpoint of the interval)

6061-T6 Aluminum Theoretical Value Experimental Value Percent Difference

Ultimate Strength 45,000 45,196.39 0.436422222

(psi)
Modulus of Elasticity 11,000,000 15,422,103 40.20093636

(psi)

From this lab, we learned too that every material can support different loads, and in a
engineering work will help us to determine which material is better for the building that is going
to be built. The results showed the stress-strain relationship and some other results.
Recommendations, to tell FIT that if it is possible to change the testing machines for
others more recent or new.
Appendix

References

 CVE 3012: Materials Lab Week 3 Tensile Test Manual