Laboratory report 4

TENSION TEST ON METALS

by

ID:
Section: KI-X

Concordia University
Table of Contents
List of Figures .................................................................................................................. 3

List of Tables ................................................................................................................... 4

1. Objective .................................................................................................................. 5

2. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 5

3. Procedure ................................................................................................................ 5

4. Results ..................................................................................................................... 7

5. Discussion .............................................................................................................. 10

6. Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 11

2
List of Figures

Figure 1: Test setup ......................................................................................................... 5

Figure 2: Loading points .................................................................................................. 6

Figure 3: Gauge selector (left), and strain indicator (right) .............................................. 6

Figure 4: FBD and shear/moment diagram for arbitrary load .......................................... 7

Figure 5: Stress-strain curve of channel 1 and 5 ............................................................. 8

Figure 6: Strain-load curve of channel 5 and 6 ................................................................ 9

Figure 7: Experimental location of neutral axis .............................................................. 10

Figure 8: Answer to question ......................................................................................... 11

3
List of Table

Table 1: Bending stresses (Pa) at each strain gauge and loading stage………………….8

Table 2: Stress at each gauge and loading using σ=Ee………………………………………9

4
 1. Objective

Compare the results of stress and strain in a beam to the expected value and use
them to determine the elastic modulus, Poisson’s ratio, and the shear modulus.

2. Introduction

In this experiment, a metal beam will undergo bending, meaning that a part of it
will be in compressive stress and another part in tensile stress. While other forces like
shear and torsion are present in practice, we only use bending stresses for simplicity. This
is vital in engineering as a lot of different components undergo this type of stress and
knowing how to analyze is critical in designing a structure that will resist the forces
present. As there is compressive and tensile stress, we can determine both the shear and
the elastic modulus, as well as Poisson’s ratio, which connects lateral and axial strain.

3. Procedure

After taking measurements on the specimens, centering it on the support (figure

1), and adjusting the zones of contact of the loading points (figure 2), turn on the strain
indicator (figure 3). Go to all 6 channels of the gauge selector (figure 3) and adjust the
reading until it reads 0±2. Start putting load on the beam in increments of 1000N, taking
notes of the readings on each channel, up to 5000N. Release the system and take make
note of the final readings for all channels.

Figure 1: Test setup

5
Figure 2: Loading points

Figure 3: Gauge selector (left), and strain indicator (right)

6
 4. Results

𝑏ℎ3 0.01894𝑚 ∗ (0.03183𝑚)3

𝐼= = = 5.089892904 ∗ 10−8 𝑚4
12 12

Figure 4: FBD and shear/moment diagram for arbitrary load

7
Table 1: Bending stresses (Pa) at each strain gauge and loading stage

loading stage (N)

gauge 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 unload
1 1.094E+07 2.189E+07 3.283E+07 4.377E+07 5.472E+07 0
2 6.945E+09 1.389E+10 2.084E+10 2.778E+10 3.473E+10 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 6.945E+09 1.389E+10 2.084E+10 2.778E+10 3.473E+10 0
5 1.094E+07 2.189E+07 3.283E+07 4.377E+07 5.472E+07 0
6 1.094E+07 2.189E+07 3.283E+07 4.377E+07 5.472E+07 0

Stress-strain curve of channel 1 and 5

6.0E+07

5.0E+07

4.0E+07

Channel 1
Stress (Pa)

3.0E+07
Channel 5
2.0E+07 y = 6.8822E+10x - 1.8109E+05 Linear (Channel 1)
y = 6.8606E+10x + 2.0296E+05 Linear (Channel 5)
1.0E+07

0.0E+00
-2.0E-04 0.0E+00 2.0E-04 4.0E-04 6.0E-04 8.0E-04 1.0E-03

-1.0E+07
Strain

Figure 5: Stress-strain curve of channel 1 and 5

𝜎
𝐸=
𝜀
68.822 ∗ 109 + 68.606 ∗ 109
𝐸= = 68.714 𝑀𝑃𝑎
2

8
 Strain-load curve of channel 5 and 6
9.000E-04

8.000E-04

7.000E-04

6.000E-04

5.000E-04 Channel 5
Strain

4.000E-04 Channel 6

3.000E-04 y = 1.5951E-07x - 2.9524E-06 Linear (Channel 5)

Linear (Channel 6)
2.000E-04
y = 4.5686E-08x + 6.1905E-07
1.000E-04

0.000E+00
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
-1.000E-04
Applied load (N)

Figure 6: Strain-load curve of channel 5 and 6

4.5686 ∗ 10−8
𝑣= = 0.2864
1.5951 ∗ 10−7

Table 2: Stress at each gauge and loading using σ=Ee

loading stage (N)

gauge 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 unload
1 3.220E+07 6.360E+07 9.700E+07 1.274E+08 1.594E+08 6.000E+05
2 1.980E+07 3.920E+07 5.980E+07 7.840E+07 9.820E+07 4.000E+05
3 2.000E+05 2.000E+05 2.000E+05 8.000E+05 1.200E+06 2.000E+05
4 1.900E+07 3.840E+07 5.780E+07 7.720E+07 9.700E+07 2.000E+05
5 3.140E+07 6.320E+07 9.520E+07 1.266E+08 1.592E+08 6.000E+05
6 9.200E+06 1.820E+07 2.780E+07 3.660E+07 4.580E+07 2.000E+05
𝐸 200 ∗ 109
𝐺= = = 77.735 ∗ 109 𝑃𝑎
2(1 + 𝑣) 2(1 + 0.2864)

Using our value for Poisson’s ratio and the given one for elastic modulus of steel,
we can see that we were really close to the published value of 77*109 Pa.

9
 Location of neutral axis
4.000E-04
y = 0.455x - 7E-21
3.000E-04
Distance from horizontal mid-plane

2.000E-04

1.000E-04
(m)

0.000E+00
-1.000E-03-8.000E-04-6.000E-04-4.000E-04-2.000E-040.000E+002.000E-044.000E-046.000E-048.000E-041.000E-03
-1.000E-04

-2.000E-04

-3.000E-04

-4.000E-04
Strain

Figure 7: Experimental location of neutral axis

From the experiment, the location of the neutral axis would be 7*10-21 meters away
from the centroid. In theory that distance should be zero, that means that we are
extremely close to the expected value.

Looking at table 1, experimental stress value, and table 2, theoretical stress value,
we can see quite a big difference in answers. For example, the experimental value for
5000 N for gauge 1 is 5.472*107 Pa, while the theoretical value is 1.594*108. This is an
error of almost 300%. Gauges 1, 2, and 6 are under compression stress and gauges 3,
4, and 5 are under tensile stress.

5. Discussion

The graph of strain versus distance from the mid-plane of the beam confirms the
usual assumption that a plane section remains the same before and after bending.

As we saw from our results, there are a lot of discrepancies between our
experimental values and the theoretical ones. These errors can come from multiple
different sources, one of them being the uneven placement of the loading points. This can
result in variations during the readings. The rate of pump and the quality of the piece of

10
steel we were provided can also explain a bit of the discrepancies. Although, the biggest
source of error is most likely the fragile circumstances of the montage. Indeed, if any
electrical device was in proximity of the gauge selector and strain indicator (figure 3), it
could have greatly affected our readings as they are machines which are very sensitive.

Figure 8: Answer to question

6. Conclusion

From our results, we can see variations in the experimental and theoretical values
for stresses. This is caused by our many sources of error, but we still got to work with a

11
situation that is similar to pure bending. Thanks to that, we understood that relation
between the shear and elasticity modulus and the use of Poisson’s ratio.

12